ArticleMaedica2026
Validity of a Questionnaire Assessing Preparedness and Self-Reported Confidence of Lebanese Emergency Department Personnel in Managing Ophthalmic Emergencies and Mass Ocular Trauma.
Article in Maedica, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ophthalmic emergencies constitute a significant portion of emergency department (ED) visits; yet, many non-ophthalmologists report feeling underprepared for their management. In Lebanon, mass-casualty events like the 2020 Beirut Port Blast have further highlighted the critical need for structured assessment of personnel preparedness in managing ocular trauma. This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of a novel questionnaire designed to measure the self-reported preparedness and confidence of ED personnel and first responders in managing acute ocular emergencies. Methods: A cross-sectional validation study was conducted among 431 Lebanese ED healthcare providers and first-line responders, primarily paramedics (69.6%). The 10-item Likert scale instrument underwent expert review for content validity. Psychometric evaluation included internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α and McDonald's ω) and construct validity via exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Results: The instrument demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.922; McDonald's = 0.924) and strong sampling adequacy (KMO = 0.910). EFA supported a clinically interpretable two-factor structure: "Trauma-Specific Stabilization and Escalation Confidence" and "General Emergency Preparedness in Ophthalmology". Participants reported the lowest confidence in medication indications (mean = 2.53) and training adequacy (mean = 2.62). Conclusion: The questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for assessing self-reported preparedness in ophthalmic emergency management. It can serve as a standardized benchmarking instrument to identify educational gaps and guide training interventions in high-throughput, resource-constrained acute care settings.
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.