Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31492128›Full record

SynthesisBMC health services research2019

Systematic review of the appropriateness of eye care delivery in eye care practice.

Kam Chun Ho, Fiona Stapleton, Louise Wiles, Peter Hibbert, Sally Alkhawajah, Andrew White, Isabelle Jalbert

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Kam Chun HoSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Fiona StapletonSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Louise WilesSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Peter HibbertSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Sally AlkhawajahSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Andrew WhiteSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Isabelle JalbertSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia. i.jalbert@unsw.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1351-0072

Funding

University of New South Wales Faculty of Science June Griffith FellowshipUniversity of New South Wales Faculty of Science Research Program GrantUniversity of New South Wales Tuition Fee Scholarship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHealth care systems are continually being reformed, however care improvement and intervention effectiveness are often assumed, not measured. This paper aimed to review findings from published studies about the appropriateness of eye care delivery, using existing published evidence and/or experts' practice and to describe the methods used to measure appropriateness of eye care.

methodsA systematic search was conducted using Medline, Embase and CINAHL (2006 to September 2016). Studies reporting the processes of eye care delivery against existing published evidence and/or experts' practice were selected. Data was extracted from published reports and the methodological quality using a modified critical appraisal tool. The primary outcomes were percentage of appropriateness of eye care delivery. This study was registered with PROSPERO, reference CRD42016049974.

resultsFifty-seven studies were included. Most studies assessed glaucoma and diabetic retinopathy and the overall methodological quality for most studies was moderate. The ranges of appropriateness of care delivery were 2-100% for glaucoma, 0-100% for diabetic retinopathy and 0-100% for other miscellaneous conditions. Published studies assessed a single ocular condition, a sample from a single centre or a single domain of care, but no study has attempted to measure the overall appropriateness of eye care delivery.

conclusionsThese findings indicated a wide range of appropriateness of eye care delivery, for glaucoma and diabetic eye care. Future research would benefit from a comprehensive approach where appropriateness of eye care is measured across multiple conditions with a single methodology, to guide priorities within eye care delivery and monitor quality improvement initiatives.

Indexed as

Quality of Health CareDelivery of Health CareEye DiseasesFemaleHumansMaleOffice VisitsProgram EvaluationDelivery of health careDiabetic retinopathyEvidence-based practiceGlaucomaProcess assessment (health care)Public health

Identifiers

PMID31492128
PMCPMC6731572

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.