Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33064854›Full record

ArticleDiabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association2021

Trends in diabetic retinopathy screening attendance and associations with vision impairment attributable to diabetes in a large nationwide cohort.

J G Lawrenson, E Bourmpaki, C Bunce, I M Stratton, P Gardner, J Anderson, EROS Study Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
–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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

J G LawrensonCity, University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2031-6390
E BourmpakiKings College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3371-9762
C BunceKings College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0935-3713
I M StrattonGloucestershire Retinal Research Group, Cheltenham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1172-7865
P GardnerPublic Health England, London, UK.
J AndersonHomerton University Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2355-9742
EROS Study Group

Funding

Department of Health PR-R20-0318-22001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo investigate diabetic retinopathy screening attendance and trends in certified vision impairment caused by diabetic eye disease.

methodsThis was a retrospective study of attendance in three urban UK diabetic eye screening programmes in England. A survival analysis was performed to investigate time from diagnosis to first screen by age and sex. Logistic regression analysis of factors influencing screening attendance during a 15-month reporting period was conducted, as well as analysis of new vision impairment certifications (Certificate of Vision Impairment) in England and Wales from 2009 to 2019.

resultsOf those newly registered in the Routine Digital Screening pathway (n = 97 048), 80% attended screening within the first 12 months and 88% by 36 months. Time from registration to first eye screening was longer for people aged 18-34 years, and 20% were unscreened after 3 years. Delay in first screen was associated with increased risk of referable retinopathy. Although 95% of participants (n = 291 296) attended during the 15-month reporting period, uptake varied considerably. Younger age, social deprivation, ethnicity and duration of diabetes were independent predictors of non-attendance and referable retinopathy. Although the last 10 years has seen an overall reduction in vision impairment certification attributable to diabetic eye disease, the incidence of vision impairment in those aged <35 years was unchanged.

conclusionsWhilst the majority of participants are screened in a timely manner, there is considerable variation in uptake. Young adults, have sub-optimal attendance, and levels of vision impairment in this population have not changed over the last 10 years. There is an urgent need to explore barriers to/enablers of attendance in this group to inform policy initiatives and tailored interventions to address this issue.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildCohort StudiesDiabetes MellitusDiabetic RetinopathyEnglandFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient Compliance

Identifiers

PMID33064854
PMCPMC8048647

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.