ArticlePatient preference and adherence2021
Comprehensive Analysis to Uncover Determinants of Patient Appointment Compliance in Ophthalmology at the Kresge Eye Institute, USA.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patterns of appointment cancellations and no-shows across and within ophthalmology subspecialties.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Social vulnerability and reliability to attend clinic appointments in an urban oculoplastic surgery clinic.Orbit (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- The Association of Social Determinants of Health on Monitoring for Disease Progression Among Patients With Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Neighborhood Poverty and Clinic Attendance in the Michigan Screening and Intervention for Glaucoma and Eye Health Through Telemedicine Program.Journal of glaucoma · 2025Article
- Sex or Gender Reporting in Ophthalmology Clinical Trials Among US Food and Drug Administration Approvals, 1995 to 2022.JAMA ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Inequities and Research Gaps in Ophthalmology: A Scoping Review.JAMA ophthalmology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAppointment compliance (AC) has a significant impact on patient care; however, determinants of AC in Ophthalmology and its subspecialties remains elusive.
methodsWe performed a five-year retrospective analysis across Kresge Eye Institute (KEI) and its affiliated Michigan locations. A total of 597,364 appointments across >13 subspecialties were included. AC was the primary outcome of interest. Compliant (CO) and non-compliant (NC) groups were compared to the following variables: patient characteristics (gender, race, age, insurance), appointment rank (relative to patient history), scheduling location, month, and ophthalmic specialty, in regard to arrival and no-show.
resultsAmong all appointments, 59.77% were associated with a female patient and 79.16% of the total number of appointments depicted patient compliance. AC differed concerning specialty, with retina representing the highest compliance across all appointments. Among 200+ insurance providers, Medicare was most frequently used and represented the highest share of CO appointments. African Americans were the primary ethnicity served by KEI and had the highest number of NC appointments.
conclusionOur study demonstrates the impact of patient demographics, appointment characteristics, and ophthalmic subspecialty on AC. A better understanding of these determinants could allow for an increased CO for Ophthalmology practices.
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.