An international study of almost 1,000 people living with sight loss, led by University College London (UCL) researchers, found that nearly one in five reported receiving or encountering eye treatments they believed to be “bogus.”
The study, published in JAMA Ophthalmology, raises concerns in the eye health community about how patients navigate an increasingly complex environment of health information and commercial treatment claims.
Online ads drove most encounters
The study team, supported by NIHR Biomedical Research Center: Moorfields, surveyed 955 adults with diagnosed eye conditions in the U.K. and U.S. to gauge how often they came across treatments they perceived as lacking sufficient scientific evidence or regulatory credibility, where they encountered them and what influenced their decisions to accept or reject them.
The survey found that 19.1% of participants reported encountering treatments they believed to be bogus. Most chose not to proceed, but about one in four underwent treatment.
Nearly 58% of participants reported seeing online advertising for these treatments. Some, however, first heard about a treatment during an appointment with an eye care professional. Those participants were significantly more likely to undergo treatment than those who encountered online advertising and marketing.
The study was led by professor Mariya Moosajee and Dr. Lee Jones. Jones, a postdoctoral research fellow at the UCL Institute of Ophthalmology and the NIHR Clinical Research Facility, Moorfields Eye Hospital, said, “Our results highlight the importance of clear and evidence-based communication between clinicians and patients as new therapies emerge and online marketing continues to expand across the world.
“Our study is about patient perceptions rather than whether the treatments really were bogus or not. But what we’ve shown is the importance of helping patients to tell the difference between evidence-based treatments and unsupported company claims.”
Treatments ranged from vitamins to stem cells
The treatments reported by participants covered a broad range, including nutritional supplements and vitamins; complementary and alternative therapies such as acupuncture and homeopathy; regenerative therapies, including stem cell treatments; electromagnetic devices; and topical substances.
Almost 80% of the participants who turned down treatment said they did not trust the claims being made. Others reported avoiding treatment after seeking further advice from a health care professional.
For those who underwent treatment, experiences varied considerably. Some people reported spending more than £10,000, while a small number described adverse effects, including worsening vision, increased visual symptoms or other health problems.
The study also found differences between countries. Participants in the U.S. were more likely than those in the U.K. to report encountering these treatments and undergoing them.
Publication details
Patient-Reported Exposure to Potentially Bogus Ophthalmic Treatments, JAMA Ophthalmology (2026). DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2026.4121
Journal information:
JAMA Ophthalmology
Key medical concepts
Clinical categories
Citation:
Nearly 1 in 5 people with sight loss report encountering bogus treatments (2026, September 24)
retrieved 16 October 2026
from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2026-09-people-sight-loss-encountering-bogus.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no
part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
