We ophthalmologists are very spoiled, indeed. Not only did we select a magnificent specialty that offers multiple opportunities to improve the quality of life of our patients, but, for a long time, it also seemed that every new therapy introduced was of some benefit to our patients, often enormous benefit. Beginning in 1976 with the first publication from the Diabetic Retinopathy Study, there was a series of publications cataloging and documenting the value of therapeutic intervention for branch retinal vein occlusion, neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD), choroidal neovascularization in ocular histoplasmosis, diabetic macular edema, open-angle glaucoma treated with argon laser trabeculoplasty, and a host of others. Many practicing ophthalmologists assumed—and we can validate the authenticity of this assumption because we have heard the opinion expressed many times—that when the National Eye Institute supported a randomized clinical trial, it was only to document for the literature the value of a therapy
Fine SL, Maguire MG. We Are Very Spoiled. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115(7):915–916. doi:10.1001/archopht.1997.01100160085015
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: