ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2019
Patient-reported reasons for delay in diagnosis of age-related macular degeneration: a national survey.
Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tele-ophthalmology-enabled and artificial intelligence-ready referral pathway for community optometry referrals of retinal disease: HERMES cluster randomised trial with a diagnostic accuracy study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Trial
- Optimising the patient pathway for macular conditions requiring intravitreal injections.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Social deprivation in neovascular age-related macular degeneration: when equal treatment does not deliver equal vision.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Unveiling the non-linear synergistic effects of smoking and aging on cataract-AMD comorbidity: an explainable artificial intelligence approach.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Retinal Ischemia: Therapeutic Effects and Mechanisms of Paeoniflorin.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence-driven diagnosis for age-related macular degeneration bridging pathology and engineering: a survey.International ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Timely care for age-related macular degeneration: a qualitative study among retina specialists in Israel.Israel journal of health policy research · 2024Article
- Disease latency bias and the protective effect of metformin against age-related macular degeneration.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Review.JAMA · 2024Review
- A Novel Optometry-Led Decision-Making Community Referral Refinement Scheme for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration Screening.Clinical optometry · 2024Article
- Associations with baseline visual acuity in 12,414 eyes starting treatment for neovascular AMD.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- Content Validity and Cognitive Debriefing of a Patient-Reported Outcome Instrument Evaluating Symptoms and Disease Impact in Patients with Geographic Atrophy.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- Impact of First Healthcare Provider onClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- Urinary Mass Spectrometry Profiles in Age-Related Macular Degeneration.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Age-related macular degeneration.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2021Review
- A qualitative exploration of Australian eyecare professional perspectives on Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD) care.PloS one · 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
objectivesTo investigate whether people with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) are able to self-detect symptoms and, if so, what symptoms they experience, from whom they first seek help, whether help is sought within the 1 week recommended by the Royal College of Ophthalmologists' guidelines and reasons for any delay. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A retrospective, cross-sectional survey design. Postal surveys were sent to 4000 members of the UK Macular Society. Inclusion criteria were participants aged >50 years at diagnosis of AMD with diagnosis after August 2008; criteria were met by 621 respondents. The main outcome was reasons for delays in diagnosis for wet AMD. Data were analysed using χ
resultsOnly one third (n=199; 32%) of respondents were able to self-detect symptoms. In line with national guidance, over half (n=131; 64%) of those self-detecting symptoms sought help promptly. For those whose initial diagnosis was delayed more than 1 week, 27% had potentially treatable wet AMD requiring urgent treatment to prevent vision loss. Reasons for delay reflected individual & service-related issues, including AMD not being detected in the initial consultation, and individuals not perceiving the urgency for symptom investigation.
conclusionIn practice most patients sought help within 1 week; however, potentially sight-damaging delays occurred from symptom onset to diagnosis. Suggestions for reducing delay include increasing population awareness of AMD symptoms, the need for urgent detection and close monitoring for AMD and signposting patients to appropriate support services to ensure prompt detection of any future signs of wet AMD.
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.