Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40391877›Full record

ReviewThe Laryngoscope2025

Is Ophthalmology Consult Needed for Acute Orbital Fractures?

Katherine L Webb, Samuel Oyer, Stephen Park

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Laryngoscope, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Katherine L WebbUVA, Otolaryngology, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7503-1632
Samuel OyerUniversity of Virginia Department of Otolaryngology, Facial Plastic Surgery, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.
Stephen ParkUniversity of Virginia Department of Otolaryngology, Facial Plastic Surgery, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Failure to recognize concomitant ocular injury in orbital fracture patients is a feared consequence of evaluation in the acute setting. These injuries and their accompanying functional sequelae range in severity, and reconstructive surgeons need to be sensitive to the possibility of major ocular injuries that could potentially have serious outcomes. Indications for specialty-trained ophthalmology evaluation in patients with orbital fractures remain controversial, with some advocating for an immediate and comprehensive evaluation of every patient with an orbital fracture. In many institutions, however, this may be difficult to achieve. Additionally, a reflexive emergent ophthalmologic consultation on every orbital fracture yields many normal examinations and therefore potentially places a great burden on the healthcare system. Current literature was reviewed to guide management of these injuries.

Indexed as

Eye InjuriesOphthalmologyOrbital FracturesReferral and ConsultationAcute DiseaseHumansfacial plastics/reconstructive surgeryfacial trauma repair < reconstructive surgery < facial plastics/reconstructive surgeryreconstructive surgery < facial plastics/reconstructive surgery

Identifiers

PMID40391877
PMCPMC12706551

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.