ArticleBMJ open2017
Prevalence of diabetic retinopathy in children and young people living with diabetes: protocol for a systematic review.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced deep learning model for prediction of diabetic mellitus on optical coherence tomography angiography images.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Early detection of retinal changes in children with diabetes without retinopathy using optical coherence tomography and optical coherence tomography angiography.Scientific reports · 2026Observational
- Risk factor analysis and clinical decision tree model construction for diabetic retinopathy in Western China.World journal of diabetes · 2022Article
- Systemic Disease and Ocular Comorbidity Analysis of Geographically Isolated Federally Recognized American Indian Tribes of the Intermountain West.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe frequency of diabetes mellitus in childhood is increasing. Thus, more children and young people are at risk of developing diabetic retinopathy and diabetes related visual impairment. However, there is no consensus on optimal screening strategies for the paediatric population reflecting the lack of clarity about the current burden of disease in this group. We aim to estimate the prevalence of diabetic retinopathy in children and young people living with types 1 or 2 diabetes, and to investigate potential sources of heterogeneity in this figure so as to inform screening strategies for this population. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PubMed and EMBASE will be searched from 1995 to 2016 using the OvidSP platform with no language restriction. Additionally, manual review of the references lists of included articles will be conducted. Two investigators will independently screen titles and abstracts for potential eligibility. Studies which report prevalence of diabetic retinopathy among general populations of children and young people with types 1 or 2 diabetes will be included. Pooled prevalence estimates of diabetic retinopathy reported in studies with sample size greater than 200 participants will be calculated by the random effect model. Forest plots will be used to summarise individual and pooled estimates of the prevalence. Heterogeneity between studies will be assessed using the ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required as this is a review of anonymised published data. We will report the findings of this systematic review in a peer-reviewed journal, and share it with the relevant professionals including health authorities through our Diabetic Eye disease in Childhood Study collaborative network. CLINICAL TRAIL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42017067178).
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.