ArticleAtencion primaria2020
[Prevalence and risk factors associated with diabetic retinopathy in Santander. Northern Spain].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the economic burden of vision loss and irreversible legal blindness in Spain (2021-2030): a societal perspective.Health economics review · 2024Article
- Changes in the Epidemiology of Diabetic Retinopathy in Spain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Exploring the Quality of Life Related to Health and Vision in a Group of Patients with Diabetic Retinopathy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Prevalence and risk factors of diabetic retinopathy among Chinese adults with type 2 diabetes in a suburb of Shanghai, China.PloS one · 2022Article
- [Analysis of the prevalence and major risk factors associated with diabetic retinopathy].Atencion primaria · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objetiveTo assess the prevalence and risk factors associated with diabetic retinopathy (DR) in Cantabria.
designross-sectional population based study. LOCATION: Health center of Cantabria. PARTICIANTS: A random sample of 442 patients with type 2 diabetes. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Non-mydiatric retinography, classifying them according to the International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy Disease Severity Scale. The analyzed risk factors were: age, gender, age at diabetes onset, duration of diabetes, glycated haemoglobin levels (A1C), treatment of diabetes, blood pressure (systolic and diastolic), serum lipids concentration, body mass index, smoking status, hematocrit, pregnancy, serum vitamin D (25 OH D) levels, nephropathy and cardiovascular events.
resultsThe prevalence of DR was 8.56% (CI: 5.81-11.32): Mild non-proliferative DR: 5.07% (CI: 2.89-7.25); Moderate non-proliferative DR: 1.38% (CI: 0.17-2.60); Severe non-proliferative DR: 0.27% (CI: 0.006-1.28); proliferative DR: 1.84% (CI: 0.46-3.22). Diabetic macular oedema: 2.30% (CI: 0.77-3.83). Mean age: 70 years, mean diagnostic age: 58.97 years, mean body mass index 29.86, 78.40% patients with hypertension, 67.30% dyslipidemia and median A1C: 6.7%. A deficit of 25 (OH) D was identified in 77% of patients. In the multivariate analysis, treatment of type 2 diabetes, body mass index, duration of diabetes and metabolic control of glycaemia were identified as independent risk factors.
conclusionsThe prevalence of DR, compared with former studies, has decreased to 8.56%; this decrease is associated with the improvement in the control of modifiable risk factors. The associated independent risk factors were: treatment, body mass index, duration and control of diabetes. The variables antihypertensive treatment, cardiovascular events and nephropathy showed predictive value for DR.
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.