Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41083733›Full record

ReviewEye (London, England)2025

Sustainability practices made easy.

Francesc March de Ribot, Anna March de Ribot, Sjoerd Elferink, Redmer van Leeuwen, David Chang, Oliver Findl

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Eye (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Francesc March de RibotDepartment of Ophthalmology, Girona University, Girona, Spain. march.professor@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9438-4740
Anna March de RibotDepartment of Ophthalmology, Girona University, Girona, Spain.
Sjoerd ElferinkDepartment of Ophthalmology, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4345-7356
Redmer van LeeuwenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Radboud Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
David ChangDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Oliver FindlVienna Institute for Research in Ocular Surgery, A Karl Landsteiner Institute, Hanusch Hospital, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Climate change is a significant challenge worldwide, with implications ranging from extreme weather events to rising sea levels and ecosystem disruptions. Addressing these issues requires a shift towards sustainable practices and global solutions. Healthcare and ophthalmology have a significant responsibility and an opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and waste, increase efficiency, and maintain safety and quality. Ophthalmology impact is relevant for the high number of patients and procedures, high patient volumes requiring travel to clinics, and extensive use of single-use disposable materials. Eye practices can be more sustainable by optimizing ventilation, using alcohol-based hand rubs, reducing drug waste by reusing medications, and reducing packaging waste. In patient management, we can reduce postoperative visits, evaluate bilateral surgeries, and minimize SF6 gas. The ophthalmology community should critically reassess daily practices to enhance sustainability.

Indexed as

Climate ChangeOphthalmologyHumans

Identifiers

PMID41083733
PMCPMC12623921

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.