ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2025
Patient-Reported LASIK Outcomes on RealSelf: a Social Media Review Platform.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessing Patient Satisfaction Following Otoplasty: A Social Media Analysis.Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK), the most commonly performed elective refractive surgery, has reported patient satisfaction rates of 95%-99%. RealSelf, a social media review platform, is a source of patient-reported narrative reviews. The goal of this retrospective study was to characterize patient reviews for LASIK on RealSelf and determine factors influencing patient satisfaction. Patients and Methods: Reviews for LASIK posted 2007-2022 on RealSelf were extracted using a web scraper. Written reviews were categorized as positive or negative. Content was further categorized into primary themes: adverse effect, bedside manner, comfort, cost, office environment, and refractive result. Pearson's chi-square and Fisher's exact tests with Bonferroni correction were performed using the Python SciPy library, with p < 0.05 considered significant unless otherwise stated. Results: Of 464 written reviews, 76.7% were positive. Refractive result was more likely than all other factors to be the primary theme of positive reviews, while cost was least likely (p < 0.001). Adverse effect and refractive result were more likely than other factors to be the primary theme of negative reviews (p ≤ 0.002). Positive reviews were more likely than negative reviews to cite refractive result as a primary theme (p < 0.001). The most common adverse effect mentioned was dry eye. Conclusion: Refractive result was most likely to be a primary determinant of patient satisfaction; cost was least likely. Studying factors contributing to patient postoperative satisfaction can inform ophthalmologists seeking to improve patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.