ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2026
Modified Delphi expert consensus on the optimal intravitreal treatment pathway for centre involving diabetic macular oedema patients within the National Health Service.
Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 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
aimsTo establish consensus-based guidance on optimising anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and corticosteroid use in centre-involving diabetic macular oedema (CI-DMO).
methodsA two-round modified Delphi study was conducted among medical retina (MR) specialists in the National Health Service in England. In total, 82 statements were developed by a steering group and rated by a wider Delphi panel using a four-point Likert scale. Consensus was predefined as ≥75%.
resultsIn rounds one and two, 30 and 39 MR specialists responded to the survey, respectively. In total, consensus was achieved for 64/82 statements (78%). Key outcomes were consensus on the value of personalised treatment strategies, consensus of MR specialists to validate a definition of non-response to intravitreal treatment for DMO as a reduction in central retinal thickness (CRT) by ≤10% and a suboptimal response as a reduction in CRT by 10-20% (these thresholds were adapted from those proposed by Downey
conclusionsThis Delphi study provides a consensus-based framework to support personalised treatment decisions in CI-DMO, highlighting the importance of timely optimisation of anti-VEGF and corticosteroid therapies in cases of suboptimal response and non-response. However, as these recommendations are derived from expert consensus rather than prospective clinical validation and all panellists were from England, generalisability to other healthcare settings may be limited. Additionally, patient representatives were not included, and the recommendations require validation in clinical practice.
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.