ArticlePloS one2017
Effective cataract surgical coverage: An indicator for measuring quality-of-care in the context of Universal Health Coverage.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
68 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 121 citations in OpenAlex.
- Regional disparities in effective cataract surgical coverage and relative quality gap in India: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Pooled it
- Indigenous Eye Health in the Americas: The Burden of Vision Impairment and Ocular Diseases.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Access to Rehabilitation for People with Disabilities in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Pooled it
- Interventions to improve access to cataract surgical services and their impact on equity in low- and middle-income countries.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Changing trends of blindness, visual impairment and cataract surgery in Bhutan: 2009-2018.PloS one · 2019Trial
- Article
- Chronological age was not an independent predictor of visual recovery following cataract surgery in adults aged ≥ 75 years: a retrospective tertiary referral centre audit.International ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Variations in post-operative cataract surgery instructions among eye health workers in Tanzania: a cross-sectional survey.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Residence and insurance inequities in the timeliness of access to first-eye cataract surgery in Eastern China.International ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Comparative Outcomes of Immediate Versus Delayed Sequential Bilateral Cataract Surgery: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Changes in the prevalence, causes of visual impairment, and cataract service coverage in Karamoja, Uganda, between 2015 and 2023: Findings from two cross-sectional surveys.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Effective Cataract Surgery Coverage and Potential Influencing Factors for Adults in Fujian, Southeast of China: Fujian Eye Study.BioMed research international · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Risk factors for self-reports of diagnosed cataracts among older adults in Poland.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Improvement in the effective cataract surgical coverage in Malaysia: evidence of impact from a mobile cataract outreach program.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Changing patterns in cataract surgery indications, outcomes, and costs, 2012-2023: a retrospective study at Aravind Eye Hospitals, India.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2025Article
- Rapid assessment of avoidable blindness in Yueqing, an economically developed area in eastern China.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Prevalence and management of cataracts among older adults in Sub-Saharan Africa: a scoping review.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo define and demonstrate effective cataract surgical coverage (eCSC), a candidate UHC indicator that combines a coverage measure (cataract surgical coverage, CSC) with quality (post-operative visual outcome).
methodsAll Rapid Assessment of Avoidable Blindness (RAAB) surveys with datasets on the online RAAB Repository on April 1 2016 were downloaded. The most recent study from each country was included. By country, cataract surgical outcome (CSOGood, 6/18 or better; CSOPoor, worse than 6/60), CSC (operated cataract as a proportion of operable plus operated cataract) and eCSC (operated cataract and a good outcome as a proportion of operable plus operated cataract) were calculated. The association between CSC and CSO was assessed by linear regression. Gender inequality in CSC and eCSC was calculated.
findingsDatasets from 20 countries were included (2005-2013; 67,337 participants; 5,474 cataract surgeries). Median CSC was 53.7% (inter-quartile range[IQR] 46.1-66.6%), CSOGood was 58.9% (IQR 53.7-67.6%) and CSOPoor was 17.7% (IQR 11.3-21.1%). Coverage and quality of cataract surgery were moderately associated-every 1% CSC increase was associated with a 0.46% CSOGood increase and 0.28% CSOPoor decrease. Median eCSC was 36.7% (IQR 30.2-50.6%), approximately one-third lower than the median CSC. Women tended to fare worse than men, and gender inequality was slightly higher for eCSC (4.6% IQR 0.5-7.1%) than for CSC (median 2.3% IQR -1.5-11.6%).
conclusioneCSC allows monitoring of quality in conjunction with coverage of cataract surgery. In the surveys analysed, on average 36.7% of people who could benefit from cataract surgery had undergone surgery and obtained a good visual outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.