ArticleEye (London, England)2026
Trends in glaucoma practices among a cohort of ophthalmologists in Latin America: A survey-based study.
Article in Eye (London, England), 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo descriptively assess clinical preferences, practice patterns, and demographic characteristics related to glaucoma care among a cohort of ophthalmologists in Latin America, through a structured survey focusing on intraocular pressure measurement methods, visual field testing, and work-related perceptions.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted to assess the clinical practices of ophthalmologists who attended the XLVI Inter-American Course in Clinical Ophthalmology (CURSO) at the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute. The survey collected demographic and professional data, as well as information on practice patterns, preferences, and beliefs related to glaucoma evaluation. The responses were categorised and analysed to identify trends in clinical practices.
resultsIn a survey of 142 Latin American ophthalmologists attending the XLVI Inter-American CURSO, the Goldmann tonometer was the most used, preferred, and trusted method for IOP measurement. Humphrey visual fields were the predominant tool for perimetry. Sixty-three percent reported having an assistant to assess basic parameters like visual acuity and IOP. Most participants (90%) worked in the private sector; 51% considered their compensation fair, while 27% felt undercompensated. Retirement age expectations varied, with most planning to work until at least age 70.
conclusionGlaucoma evaluation results from this survey may reflect Latin American practice patterns. Based on this assumption, Goldmann and Humphrey are the most popular tools for measuring IOP and conducting perimetry, ophthalmic assistants often assess basic eye parameters, and ophthalmologists report varying satisfaction with their income and retirement age.
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.