ArticleEuropean journal of ophthalmology2026
Choroidal nevus candidacy for monitoring in a virtual photoscreening pathway.
Article in European journal of ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
PurposeTo evaluate the proportion of patients with choroidal nevus in an ocular oncology practice who would be suitable candidates for monitoring via a virtual photoscreening model, wherein imaging is asynchronously reviewed and longitudinally managed by an ocular oncologist.MethodsData were abstracted from the Prospective Ocular Tumor Study Database for all patients diagnosed with choroidal nevus from July 2019-October 2024. A stratification model for identification of virtual pathway candidates was defined and implemented as follows: good virtual pathway candidates included those with posteriorly located lesions for adequate photographic capture and no more than two high-risk features. Risk factors, outlined by the TFSOM-DIM acronym, included thickness >2 mm, presence of subretinal fluid, visual acuity 20/50 or worse, presence of orange pigment, low internal reflectivity, and basal diameter >5 mm. Of posteriorly located lesions, those with 0-2 risk factors were defined as good virtual pathway candidates, 3 risk factors as acceptable in select cases, and 4 or more as poor candidates.ResultsThere were 614 choroidal nevi in 586 patients diagnosed during the study period. Mean patient age at initial visit was 63.5 years old (median 66.1, range 5.8-94.8), with 59.4% female and 98.8% white. Analysis identified 436 (71%) nevi in 408 (69.6%) patients as good virtual pathway candidates, 53 (8.6%) nevi in 53 (9%) patients as potential candidates in select cases, and 125 (20.4%) nevi in 125 (21.3%) patients as poor candidates.ConclusionNearly 70% of patients with choroidal nevi followed by Mayo Clinic Ocular Oncology were identified as good candidates for follow-up via virtual photoscreening. This highlights the potential for improved clinical efficiency through virtual frameworks in ocular oncology.
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.