Retinal Specialist Survey · 2026

Your clinic instincts are
shaping the future of retinal care

Join retinal specialists who are shaping the future of retinal care. 5 minutes. Anonymous. Your experience matters.

Helping reduce the time and effort needed to understand complex follow-up cases

This work supports the development of a decision-ready tool for longitudinal retinal care.

~5 minutes
Anonymous · no passwords
Dr. Hanan Alghamdi — Associate Professor of AI in Medical Imaging
Dr. Safwan Tayeb — Assistant Professor of Ophthalmology
Retinal fundus image
Residents & fellows: your perspective is just as critical — you see the workflow friction that consultants often miss  Residents Welcome
Getting started 0%

In busy retinal clinics, reviewing a single complex case can take 10–30 minutes — often across multiple systems.

We're studying where this time goes — to build tools that make clinical review faster and clearer.

1
In a typical busy clinic day, which part of your retinal follow-up review takes the most time?*
Select the one that takes the longest — even when you have enough time
Reviewing prior OCT scans across visits
Comparing disease activity over time (e.g., IRF/SRF changes)
Reviewing injection / treatment history and intervals
Gathering data from multiple systems or devices
Reviewing systemic or non-ocular context (e.g., diabetes, BP)
Other:
💡 This is exactly the kind of insight we are here to understand. Thank you.
About You
2
What is your current clinical role?*
Consultant / Attending retinal specialist
Retinal fellowship trainee
Ophthalmology resident
General ophthalmologist (retinal interest)
✨ Residents & fellows: Your answers matter enormously. You witness the handoff gaps and the moments when attending physicians don't have time to review history properly. That lived experience is data we can't get anywhere else.
3
Years managing retinal disease patients*
In training / < 1 year
1–3 years
3–10 years
> 10 years
4
Primary practice setting*
Select all that apply
Academic
University hospital
Private hospital / clinic
Government hospital
5
Average patients seen per clinic session & average time per patient*
PATIENTS / CLINIC SESSION
< 20
20–40
41–60
> 60
MINUTES / PATIENT
< 5 min
5–10 min
10–15 min
> 15 min
Your Workflow
6
Which disease type do you find most cognitively demanding to manage longitudinally?*
Select one
DR / DME
AMD (wet & dry)
Retinal vascular occlusion
Vitreoretinal interface
Uveitis
Other:
7
When reviewing a follow-up retinal patient, what do you look at first?*
Select all that apply
Most recent OCT
Visual acuity change
Prior injection / treatment history
Prior OCT trend across visits
Fluid status (IRF / SRF) history
Systemic disease context (diabetes, BP, medications)
Other:
8
How many prior visits do you typically review before deciding to treat or defer?*
Only the most recent visit
2–3 prior visits
4–6 prior visits
All prior available visits
Clinical Reality
9
Which factors make treat vs. defer decisions most challenging?*
Select up to 3
Subtle decline in visual acuity or visual function
Subtle OCT changes over time
Difficulty assessing response to prior treatment over time
Other ocular factors (e.g., IOP, ocular surface disease)
Systemic factors (e.g., diabetes, hypertension, medications)
Difficulty assessing patient follow-up and treatment adherence
Other:
10
How much time pressure do you feel reviewing prior data during follow-up visits?*
Very lowVery high
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
11
How confident are you in treat vs. defer decisions given the time available?*
Very low confidenceVery high confidence
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
12
What is the single biggest challenge when reviewing longitudinal retinal data?*
One sentence is enough — your words matter more than you think
🙏 This kind of clinical insight is exactly what is missing from the published literature. We will make sure it counts.
13
In the past month, how often has difficulty accessing or reviewing longitudinal patient data led to:*
Think back to last month — even one instance is meaningful
Clinical Consequence Never1–2 times3–5 times>5 times
Delayed treatment decision
Uncertainty requiring extra review time
A decision you later reconsidered
Increased cognitive effort to synthesize information
Your Environment
14
Which system do you use to store and view retinal imaging in your clinic?
Select all that apply
PACS — hospital-wide image archive
Device-native viewer (e.g., Heidelberg Eye Explorer, Zeiss Forum)
Integrated EMR with imaging module
No central storage — each device stores independently
Multiple systems — I switch between different platforms during review
Easy to use — imaging and data are accessible without extra steps
Ease of use — the tool must fit naturally into my workflow
Other:
15
Is your retinal imaging automatically linked to the patient's clinical record?
Yes — fully integrated, imaging links automatically to patient record
Partially — manual linking is required
No — imaging and clinical records are completely separate
I don't know
16
Which EMR / clinical record system does your clinic use?
Select all that apply
VIDA
BestCare
MOH System
Epic
Medisoft
Openmed
Custom / hospital-built system
Other:
17
How satisfied are you with your current systems for longitudinal review?
Rate each from 1 (very painful) to 7 (excellent)
OCT viewer / imaging system
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
EHR / patient record system
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Injection tracking / scheduling
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
18
Is your clinic a teaching environment with residents or fellows?
Select the option that best describes your setting
Yes — residents/fellows review patients before I see them
Yes — but I review all imaging and history myself
No — I practice independently
I am a resident / fellow presenting to a consultant
19
What is the most frustrating limitation of your current systems for longitudinal review?
Future of Care

Shaping Better Clinical Decisions Together

20
How helpful would a tool that brings all relevant patient data into one clear view be for your decision-making?*
Not helpful at allExtremely helpful
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
21
What concerns would you have about adopting an AI assisted tool that helps review patient data across visits?*
Select all that apply
Accuracy of automated analysis or comparisons
Risk of incorrect recommendations affecting patient care
Disruption to my current workflow
Difficulty integrating with existing systems (EMR, imaging devices)
Data privacy and security
Lack of clinical evidence or validation
Over-reliance on the tool
No major concerns
22
If you could improve ONE aspect of your retinal follow-up workflow, what would have the biggest impact?*
Select one
Easier comparison of imaging across visits
Clearer understanding of treatment response over time
Better visualization of longitudinal patient history
Reduced time spent gathering data
More confidence in complex decision-making
Other:
23
Which best describes your adoption attitude if this tool existed today?*
I would try it immediately
I would try it selectively in complex cases
I would wait to see evidence from peers
I would need formal clinical validation first
I would be unlikely to adopt it
24
How often would you realistically use a longitudinal summary tool in your clinic?*
For every follow-up patient
For most follow-up patients
For selected patients (e.g., complex or uncertain cases)
Rarely — only if it required no extra steps
I would not use it
25
If this tool required a small change to your current OCT viewing workflow, would you still adopt it?*
Yes — if the clinical benefit is clear
Yes — but only after seeing validation or peer use
Only if the change is minimal and seamless
No — I prefer my current workflow
26
Think of a recent case where reviewing prior OCTs or treatment history was difficult enough to affect your confidence or decision.
💎 Every retinal specialist has faced this — your specific case helps us understand the real impact.
27
If a tool instantly summarized each patient's longitudinal history before you walked in, how much time do you think it would save per patient?
Less than 30 seconds — minimal impact
30–60 seconds per patient
1–2 minutes per patient
2–5 minutes per patient
More than 5 minutes — significant impact on my clinic
Hard to say — depends on case complexity
28
How would your clinic prefer to pay for a tool like this?
Preferred pricing model
Per physician / per user
Per clinic (flat fee regardless of number of users)
Usage-based (e.g., per patient or per case)
Depends on demonstrated clinical impact (e.g., outcomes or time saved)
Not involved in purchasing decisions
29
Which factor would most influence your willingness to adopt a tool like this?
Select one
Time saved during clinical review
Improved decision confidence in complex cases
Demonstrated improvement in patient outcomes
Seamless integration with existing systems
Ease of use within my current workflow
Recommendation from trusted peers / specialists
Cost / budget constraints
Responses are anonymous · Analyzed in aggregate only
Dr. Hanan Alghamdi (Associate Professor of AI in Medical Imaging) · Dr. Safwan Tayeb (Assistant Professor of Ophthalmology)

How would you like to stay involved?

Select all that apply — we'll reach out accordingly.

🧪 Join a Pilot Clinic
Be among the first to test the tool in real follow-up cases in your clinic
⚡ Limited pilot spots available
🚀 Early Access to the Tool
Preview the decision-support tool before public launch
🔬 Participate in a Follow-up Interview
15–20 minute conversation about your workflow
📊 Receive the Findings
Get a summary of key results within 2 weeks

Developed with input from retinal specialists