ArticleOphthalmology science2026
Involving Patients in Developing a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Retinal Detachment.
Article in Ophthalmology science, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop a retinal detachment-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM), by involving patients in item (question) development. Design: Questionnaire development study carried out in 2 single centers. Participants: Patients were recruited from the Ophthalmic Emergency Department and the Vitreoretinal Outpatient Clinics of the Rotterdam Eye Hospital (Netherlands), using maximum variance sampling. Inclusion criteria were aged ≥18 years and a diagnosis of primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. Patients who had undergone retinal detachment repair by pneumatic retinopexy (a procedure not performed in the Rotterdam Eye Hospital) were recruited from the Vitreoretinal Outpatient Clinics of Newcastle Eye Centre (United Kingdom). Methods: Telephone interviews using an interview topic list, allowing minimum involvement of the interviewer and maximum involvement of the interviewee. Interview transcripts were coded into items (questions); items were grouped into quality-of-life (QoL) domains (themes) using an established ophthalmic QoL framework. Items similar to each other, too specific, or too unclear were removed. The minimal set of representative items was compared with the literature. Main Outcome Measures: A minimally and fully representative set of unique retinal detachment-specific items. Results: Seventy-three patients were interviewed, before or after surgery. We identified 1658 unique items, which we classified into 11 QoL domains. After 3 rounds of item refinement and cognitive interviews, the final, minimally representative item set included 355 items classified in 11 QoL domains: health concerns (45 items), emotional well-being including effects of trauma (45), activity limitation (45), coping (39), visual symptoms (33), inconveniences (33), social well-being (28), ocular symptoms (23), general symptoms (23), economic impact (22), and mobility (19). Of note, 288 items (81%) were new. There was 35% overlap with items developed for patients with macular hole, epiretinal membrane, and retinal vascular occlusions. Conclusions: We have completed the first stage of developing a retinal detachment-specific PROM with patient involvement. Retinal detachment impacts heavily on patients' QoL. Most of the QoL impact is unique to retinal detachment and described here for the first time. Financial Disclosures: The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.
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.