ArticleOphthalmology and therapy2026
Establishing Expert Consensus on a Unified Decision Framework for Retina Patient Care.
Article in Ophthalmology and therapy, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe global burden of retina care is large and increasing. Many countries have their own guidelines for diagnosis and management of the different retinal diseases, but a unified decision framework could help healthcare professionals to address capacity issues while ensuring excellent and up-to-date patient care. The purpose of this study was to explore the development of such a unified decision framework for retina care.
methodsA modified Delphi methodology was employed. A steering committee meeting with one expert from The Ophthalmology Network was held in April 2024. An independent facilitator guided the meeting, and three main topics of focus were identified. Following discussions, 27 statements were agreed upon and an online survey containing a 4-point Likert scale to indicate level of agreement was produced and distributed to ophthalmologists. Responses to surveys were anonymous, and analysis was conducted independently. The consensus threshold was defined a priori at 75%. Results were reviewed by the steering committee of eight experts resulting in the production of recommendations.
resultsOverall, 188 responses to the online survey were received from six regions (Europe, Asia, North America, South America, Africa, and Australia/Oceania). Twenty-six statements achieved very high consensus, and one achieved high consensus within three overarching topics of "accessing and maintaining retina care", "key principles of unified decision framework", and "benchmarking criteria". Further subgroup analysis revealed only 67% of clinicians with less than 5 years' experience agreed with the statement "Intravitreal injections should only be administered after reviewing an OCT scan". Since overall, there was a high level of agreement for all statements and stopping criteria were met, no further Delphi rounds were deemed necessary.
conclusionThis consensus demonstrates that retina care experts believe that a unified decision framework would be beneficial. Their recommendations should facilitate development and implementation of such a framework.
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.