ReviewDie Ophthalmologie2026
[Set them free! Better care for more patients with fewer follow-ups].
Review in Die Ophthalmologie, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn view of rising healthcare demands and limited personnel and financial resources, the targeted use of ophthalmological resources is becoming increasingly more important.
objectiveTo present an approach for identifying dispensable diagnostic, therapeutic and monitoring-related services in ophthalmology as well as strategies for their de-implementation in clinical practice.
methodsConcepts for avoiding overuse are discussed, including choosing wisely, the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) initiative "Gemeinsam Klug Entscheiden" (Choosing Wisely Together) and the comparison of national and international guidelines. In addition, the challenges of de-implementing established care routines are described.
resultsEvidence-based guidelines provide the basis for identifying dispensable diagnostic, therapeutic and monitoring-related measures. Their avoidance should be systematically considered in the development and updating of guidelines. The comparison of national and international recommendations can provide indications of dispensable services. For selected ophthalmological conditions, exemplary proposals for updating the guidelines are presented. The implementation requires the adaptation of established treatment pathways, the promotion of guideline adherence and the involvement of physicians, allied health professionals and patients.
conclusionThe combination of guideline-assisted identification of dispensable services and structured de-implementation can contribute to a more targeted use of resources, reduce the care burden on ophthalmologists and improve the availability of ophthalmological services for patients with relevant treatment needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42726222What 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.