ArticleJAMA ophthalmology2020
Glaucoma Care of Prison Inmates at an Academic Hospital.
Article in JAMA ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multifaceted behavioral interventions to improve topical glaucoma therapy adherence in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Interventions for the detection, monitoring, and management of chronic non-communicable diseases in the prison population: an international systematic review.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- Exploring medication safety in prisons: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2026Article
- The right to sight: a call for ophthalmic care standards in carceral and detention centre settings.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Ophthalmic care at an academic medical centre for patients who were incarcerated or in immigration detention.Eye (London, England) · 2025Observational
- Systematic Review of Surgical Care in the Incarcerated Population: Identifying Knowledge Gaps for Future Research.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2024Review
- Retinal Detachment in Incarcerated Patients.Journal of vitreoretinal diseasesArticle
- Incarceration and emergency department visit frequency as predictors for missing day of cataract surgery at County hospital.The journal of medicine accessArticle
- Glaucoma Care of Incarcerated Patients at an Academic Institution: A Case-Control Study.Journal of current ophthalmologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Glaucoma care for prison inmates is underrepresented in the literature even though managing the treatment of such patients may provide unique challenges. Objectives: To evaluate the glaucoma profile of prison inmates treated at an academic ophthalmology center and to report on the medical and surgical management and follow-up metrics. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study assessed data from 82 incarcerated patients treated at the glaucoma clinic, an academic referral center at the University of Illinois at Chicago, between January 2013 and December 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures: Diagnosis, glaucoma severity, medical and surgical interventions, and patient-reported medication adherence were recorded for each visit. Recommended and actual follow-up times were recorded and compared. Data analyses were conducted from January 2013 to December 2018. Results: In total, 82 patients (161 eyes) had 375 visits during the study period. All patients were male and ranged from 20 to 75 years of age (mean [SD] age, 50.8 [11.9] years). Most participants were black patients (65 [79.3%]). The most common diagnoses were primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG; 53 eyes [32.9%]) and POAG suspect (52 eyes [32.3%]). Glaucoma severity ranged from mild (25 of 77 eyes [32.5%]) to advanced (41 of 77 eyes [53.2%]). Overall, 59 patients (73.2%) were treated medically with up to 4 topical agents (40.0%). Of those treated, 70.0% of patients (95% CI, 57.7%-81.2%) reported medication nonadherence during at least 1 visit. Medication nonadherence was more common among those taking 4 different topical medications (21 of 24 [87.5%]) compared with others taking fewer medications (20 of 35 [57.1%]), for a difference of 30.4% (95% CI, 7.0%-53.6%; P = .02), and among those with advanced disease (22 of 26 [84.6%]) compared with glaucoma suspect (6 of 13 [46.2%]), for a difference of 38.4% (95% CI, 9.3%-67.5%; P = .02). Nineteen office procedures, including laser peripheral iridotomy and laser trabeculoplasty, were performed on 14 eyes. Seventeen incisional glaucoma procedures were performed on 15 eyes, including glaucoma drainage device implant (11 procedures [64.7%]) and trabeculectomy (3 procedures [17.6%]). Only 26.6% of return office visits (95% CI, 21.3%-32.3%) occurred within the recommended follow-up time frame. Furthermore, 93 patients (34.8%; 95% CI, 28.2%-40.0%) were seen more than 1 month after the recommended follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: Despite incarceration in prison, where medication administration and appointment attendance are theoretically controlled, the results of this study suggested that substantial medication and follow-up nonadherence exists among inmates.
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.