Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42802240›Full record

ArticleInternational ophthalmology2026

Glaucoma management across 13 countries in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe: an exploratory survey.

Natalia Palarie, Fidan Aghayeva, Ewa Kosior-Jarecka, Nino Kobakhidze, Maryana Kovalska, Makedonka Atanasovska-Velkovska, Karolína Skorkovská, Lidija Kelava, Ilir Osmani, Lala Ćeklić and 3 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Natalia PalarieDepartment of Ophthalmology, International Clinic, Orhei, Moldova.
Fidan AghayevaChiemsee Eye Clinic, Bavaria, Germany.
Ewa Kosior-JareckaDepartment of Diagnostics and Microsurgery of Glaucoma, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland.
Nino KobakhidzeChichua Medical Center Mzera, LLC, Tbilisi, Georgia.
Maryana KovalskaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University, Lviv, Ukraine.
Makedonka Atanasovska-VelkovskaDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Karolína SkorkovskáDepartment of Optometry and Orthoptics, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
Lidija KelavaUniversity Eye Clinic, University Clinical Hospital "Sv. Duh", Zagreb, Croatia.
Ilir OsmaniFaculty of Medical Sciences, University of Tetova, Tetovo, North Macedonia.
Lala ĆeklićSchool of Medicine, University of Vitez, Travnik, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Adriana ChicuVitreum Clinic, Baia Mare, Romania.
Neda SergeevaAlexandrovska University Hospital, Medical University of Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Qëndresë DakaMedical Faculty, University of Prishtina, Prishtinë, Kosovo. qendrese.daka@uni-pr.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo describe glaucoma management practices, access and reimbursement across 13 countries in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe (CESE).

methodsA structured questionnaire adapted from the 2015 European Glaucoma Society (EGS) survey was completed by one ophthalmologist with knowledge of prevailing practice and regulation in each participating country. The survey covered areas such as patient organization availability, national guidelines, residency training, access to diagnostic tools, treatment protocols, surgical techniques, laser treatments, minimally invasive glaucoma surgery (MIGS) and moderately invasive bleb-forming shunts (MIBS), and healthcare coverage. Responses were summarized descriptively.

resultsOphthalmology residency programs varied in duration with limited surgical training access and no subspecialty glaucoma fellowships. Diagnostic protocols were relatively standardized but showed variability in tool availability and usage. Insurance coverage ranged from full coverage to none. Medical monotherapy was usually the initial treatment. Laser treatments were variably accessible, with frequent use reported in some countries and limited availability in others. The availability of MIGS and MIBS was reported as limited in most countries, with their use generally being rare or occasional.

conclusionThis exploratory key-informant survey identified shared approaches alongside marked differences in training, reimbursement, diagnostic access and surgical availability. Findings represent reported practices and should not be interpreted as nationally representative estimates.

Indexed as

Disease ManagementFiltering SurgeryGlaucomaPractice Patterns, Physicians'EuropeHealth Services AccessibilityHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesCentral and Eastern EuropeGlaucomaHealthcare accessSoutheastern EuropeSurvey

Identifiers

PMID42802240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.