Evidence mapPaperPMID 41230290Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Ophthalmology Considerations in End-of-Life Care.

Mendel Shloush, Akiva Eleff, Eric Eleff

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. 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

3 authors.

Mendel ShloushOrthopedic Surgery, Florida International University Herbert Wertheim College of Medicine, Miami, USA.
Akiva EleffEmergency Medicine, Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine, Cleveland, USA.
Eric EleffOphthalmology, Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center, Cleveland, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ophthalmologic interventions can significantly impact quality of life, even in the context of end-of-life care. This paper explores the ethical and clinical considerations for ophthalmologic treatments in hospice care, with a focus on cataract surgery, age-related macular degeneration (ARMD) therapy, retinal detachment (RD) repair, glaucoma, painful blind eye (PBE) management, benign and surface ocular tumors, and corneal or anterior segment diseases. A review of published literature and clinical precedent was conducted to assess the benefits, risks, and practical limitations of ophthalmologic procedures in hospice patients, with an emphasis on quality of life. Cataract surgery has been shown to be cost-effective in hospice settings, offering significant improvements in vision and overall quality of life. Treatment for ARMD, though requiring ongoing injections, can provide benefits within weeks and help sustain visual function. RD repair, while more complex, can substantially restore vision when appropriately managed. Palliative glaucoma interventions, including individualized target intraocular pressures and laser therapy, can minimize treatment burden while maintaining comfort. PBEs may be managed with retrobulbar chlorpromazine or alcohol injections, and enucleation or evisceration may be considered when pain persists. Benign or surface ocular tumors and corneal or anterior segment diseases can often be addressed with conservative, comfort-focused measures to reduce symptoms and preserve quality of life. Ophthalmologic procedures should be considered viable options in end-of-life care when clinically indicated, with careful ethical review. Restoration of vision contributes meaningfully to the quality of life and deserves thoughtful inclusion in care planning.

Indexed as

cataract surgeryhospicemacular degenerationpalliative carequality of liferetinal detachmentvision

Identifiers

PMID41230290
PMCPMC12604606

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.