Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28775182›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2017

A randomised trial of non-mydriatic ultra-wide field retinal imaging versus usual care to screen for diabetic eye disease: rationale and protocol for the Clearsight trial.

Selina L Liu, Lewis W Mahon, Neil S Klar, David C Schulz, John R Gonder, Irene M Hramiak, Jeffrey L Mahon

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02579837 (CLEAR SIGHT), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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.

NCT02579837 nacompletednot on this map

CLEAR SIGHT: A Randomized Trial of Non-Mydriatic Ultra-Widefield Retinal Imaging to Screen for Diabetic Eye Disease

TypeinterventionalSponsorWestern University, CanadaRan2016 to 2020Enrolled742ConditionsDiabetes Mellitus, Diabetic RetinopathyArmsOptos 200Tx, Zeiss Cirrus
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Observational
  4. Article
  5. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Selina L LiuDivision of Endocrinology & Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0261-0385
Lewis W MahonSt. Joseph's Health Care London, London, ON, Canada.
Neil S KlarDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
David C SchulzDepartment of Ophthalmology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
John R GonderDepartment of Ophthalmology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Irene M HramiakDivision of Endocrinology & Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Jeffrey L MahonDivision of Endocrinology & Metabolism, Department of Medicine, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
Western University · CASt Joseph's Health Care · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSuboptimal screening for diabetic eye disease is a major cause of preventable vision loss. Screening barriers include mydriasis and the extra time patients need to attend dedicated eye screening appointments. In the Clearsight trial, we are testing whether screening by non-mydriatic ultra-wide field (NM UWF) imaging on the day patients attend their diabetes outpatient clinic visit improves detection of clinically important eye disease compared with usual screening. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Patients with diabetes due for a screening eye exam by the 2013 Canadian Diabetes Association (CDA) practice guidelines are being randomised to on-site screening by NM UWF imaging on the day of their clinic visit or to usual screening where, per CDA guidelines, they are encouraged to arrange an exam by an optometrist. The primary outcome is actionable eye disease (AED) based on a need for referral to ophthalmology and/or increased ocular surveillance. The primary analysis will use an intention-to-screen approach that compares the proportions of detected AED between on-site and usual screening groups under a superiority hypothesis in favour of on-site screening. With 740 randomised participants, the study will have 80% power to detect ≥5% absolute increase in the AED rate among on-site screening versus usual screening participants. This difference translates into a number-needed-to-screen by on-site screening of 20 to detect 1 additional person with AED. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by the institutional review board of Western University. The findings of the trial will be disseminated directly to participants and through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT02579837 (registered 16 October 2015). PROTOCOL ISSUE DATE: 18 November 2015.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusMass ScreeningAdolescentAdultAgedDiabetic RetinopathyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMydriaticsResearch DesignRetinaMydriaticsdiabetic eye diseasenon-mydriatic ultra-wide field imagingscreening

Identifiers

PMID28775182
PMCPMC5724207
OpenAlexW2742189238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.