Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26122748›Full record

ArticleBMC ophthalmology2015

Factors affecting cataract surgical coverage and outcomes: a retrospective cross-sectional study of eye health systems in sub-Saharan Africa.

Susan Lewallen, Elena Schmidt, Emma Jolley, Robert Lindfield, William H Dean, Colin Cook, Wanjiku Mathenge, Paul Courtright

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Evidence for national universal eye health plans.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2018
    Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors.

Susan LewallenKilimanjaro Centre for Community Ophthalmology International, Division of Ophthalmology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. slewallen@kcco.net.
Elena SchmidtSightsavers, 35 Perrymount Road, Haywards Heath, RH16 3BW, West Sussex, UK. eschmidt@sightsavers.org.
Emma JolleySightsavers, 35 Perrymount Road, Haywards Heath, RH16 3BW, West Sussex, UK. ejolley@sightsavers.org.
Robert LindfieldInternational Centre for Eye Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), London, UK. robert.lindfield@lshtm.ac.uk.
William H DeanBristol Eye Hospital, Bristol, UK. whd1_uk@hotmail.com.
Colin CookDivision of Ophthalmology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. colin.cook@uct.ac.za.
Wanjiku MathengeRwanda International Institute of Ophthalmology and Dr Agarwal's Eye Hospital, Kigali, Rwanda. ciku@email.com.
Paul CourtrightKilimanjaro Centre for Community Ophthalmology International, Division of Ophthalmology, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. pcourtright@kcco.net.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecently there has been a great deal of new population based evidence on visual impairment generated in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), thanks to the Rapid Assessment of Avoidable Blindness (RAAB) survey methodology. The survey provides information on the magnitude and causes of visual impairment for planning services and measuring their impact on eye health in administrative "districts" of 0.5-5 million people. The survey results describing the quantity and quality of cataract surgeries vary widely between study sites, often with no obvious explanation. The purpose of this study was to examine health system characteristics that may be associated with cataract surgical coverage and outcomes in SSA in order to better understand the determinants of reducing the burden of avoidable blindness due to cataract.

methodsThis was a descriptive study using secondary and primary data. The outcome variables were collected from existing surveys. Data on potential district level predictor variables were collected through a semi-structured tool using routine data and key informants where appropriate. Once collected the data were coded and analysed using statistical methods including t-tests, ANOVA and the Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance test.

resultsHigher cataract surgical coverage was positively associated with having at least one fixed surgical facility in the area; availability of a dedicated operating theatre; the number of surgeons per million population; and having an eye department manager in the facility. Variables that were associated with better outcomes included having biometry and having an eye department manager in the facility.

conclusionsThere are a number of health system factors at the district level that seem to be associated with both cataract surgical coverage and post-operative visual acuity outcomes. This study highlights the needs for better indicators and tools by which to measure and monitor the performance of eye health systems at the district level. It is unlikely that epidemiological data alone is sufficient for planning eye health services within a district and health managers and study coordinators need to consider collecting supplementary information in order to ensure appropriate planning can take place.

Indexed as

Africa South of the SaharaCataractCataract ExtractionCross-Sectional StudiesHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Services Needs and DemandHumansPrevalenceRetrospective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesVisual Acuity

Identifiers

PMID26122748
PMCPMC4485868

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.