ArticlePaediatrics & child health2026
Congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction outcomes.
Article in Paediatrics & child health, 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
Objective: To characterize children with congenital nasolacrimal duct obstruction (NLDO) seen by a pediatric ophthalmologist in terms of initiation of tear duct massage and need for lacrimal duct probing. Design: Retrospective chart review. Participants: All children with a diagnosis of congenital NLDO managed by one pediatric ophthalmologist (SH) at a tertiary pediatric center (McMaster Children's Hospital, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada). Methods: Charts were reviewed to determine the percentage of patients requiring nasolacrimal duct probing. Secondary outcomes were percentage of patients who had tear duct massage, accurate or inaccurate, initiated by the referring provider. Results: Overall, 113 patients with a mean age of 1.8 ± 1.5 years at presentation were included, and 55 (48.7%) were male. Most patients (83.2%) were referred by a primary care provider (family physician or pediatrician) and the remainder by optometrists (13.3%) or ophthalmologists (3.5%). Accurate tear duct massage was initiated by referring providers in 23% of cases. Ultimately, 44.2% of cases required probing, and 4.4% were still pending follow-up at time of data collection. Of children who learned accurate massage technique, 56% avoided surgical intervention, even when proper massage is introduced after 12 months of age. Conclusion: Most patients referred to pediatric ophthalmology for congenital NLDO did not have an appropriate trial of tear duct massage before referral, and less than half of patients required probing after appropriate massage was initiated. Educating primary care providers and optometrists on proper initiation of tear duct massage may reduce the volume of congenital NLDO referrals to pediatric ophthalmology, a subspecialty with limited physicians and long wait times.
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.