ArticleCureus2026
Re-imagining Ophthalmic Teaching and Education in Medical Programs: The ROTE Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
backgroundUndergraduate ophthalmic teaching has been subject to a global decline as ophthalmology competes for space in an increasingly crowded medical curriculum. Rather than focusing solely on increasing teaching time, strategies are needed to optimise the use of existing time by ensuring that teaching is engaging and effectively improving students' knowledge and confidence in ophthalmic skills. While the literature is rich with innovative teaching approaches for ophthalmology, the vast majority of these studies have been quantitative. This study seeks to fill this gap with a qualitative exploration of student perspectives and ideas for their own learning. Methods: A mixed-method approach was used to evaluate perspectives, preferences, and ideas regarding ophthalmology teaching among senior medical students and recent graduates of the University of New South Wales, Australia. A quantitative questionnaire was used to assess participant ratings of teaching methods, while one-on-one semi-structured qualitative interviews and thematic analysis were employed to facilitate a richer exploration of participant perspectives. Results: Quantitative data (n = 46) found that most participants (80%) received very little ophthalmology teaching time, and its effectiveness was considered poor by 57%. The two teaching methods considered least effective (didactic lectures and self-directed learning) were simultaneously the most common modes of teaching. Four themes (and 12 subthemes) emerged from the qualitative interviews (n = 12): a reason to learn, prioritising fundamentals, optimising existing learning opportunities, and re-imagining ophthalmic teaching.
conclusionsThe participants emphasised clinical relevance as a driver of learning in their approach to ophthalmic content, in alignment with adult learning theory (ALT). The participants perceived current ophthalmology teaching as insufficiently clinical, poorly structured, and inadequately integrated. They craved hands-on teaching and clinical exposure to spark their curiosity and intrinsic motivation to learn. A blended learning approach employing well-structured lectures and online modules with self-assessments, hands-on teaching in clinical settings, and competency-based assessments would represent students' and graduates' ideal re-imagining of the ophthalmic curriculum.
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.