ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2021
Fundus Examination of 23,861 Newborns by Digital Imaging in Ningbo.
Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of sight-threatening ocular abnormalities identified by retinal examination in neonates: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pediatrics · 2026Pooled it
- Analysis of full-term neonatal eye disease screening results and trends from 2016 to 2023.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- RB-Care: An Artificial Intelligence System for Automatic Quantitative Assessment and Surveillance of Retinoblastoma.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- RDLR: A Robust Deep Learning-Based Image Registration Method for Pediatric Retinal Images.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2024Article
- The Evaluation of Ocular Posterior Segment Findings in 5527 Term Infants Using Smartphone-Based Fundus Imaging.Journal of ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Incomplete retinal vascularization with retinopathy of prematurity-like ridges in healthy full-term newborns.International 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo perform fundus examinations of full-term and premature infants to identify common congenital ocular diseases and determine the incidence and additional risk factors in Ningbo, China.
methodsFundus examinations were performed on newborns between January 2017 and July 2020 in Ningbo using a RetCam3 or PanoCam LT wide-field digital imaging system. The neonates' birth weight, gestational age, gender, delivery mode, oxygen intake, and other conditions were recorded. We compared the incidence of ocular abnormalities in both full-term newborns and premature infants.
resultsThere were 23,861 newborns in this study comprising 12,605 (52.8%) male and 11,256 (47.2%) female infants, 20,938 full-term babies, and 2,923 premature babies. The average gestational age was 37.9 ± 5.6 weeks, and the average birth weight was 3,189 ± 417 g. Overall, we found ocular abnormalities in 6,645 (27.8%). The most common abnormality in full-term newborns was retinal hemorrhage (RH), which we found in 3,827 (18.3%) cases. Other diseases identified included familial exudative vitreoretinopathy (FEVR), retinoblastoma (RB), and congenital cataracts. The delivery method had a significant impact on the incidence of neonatal RH (
conclusionEarly examination and prompt treatment of ocular disorders in newborns are important to avoid lifelong visual impairment. Eye examinations should be performed during the neonatal period and at regular follow-up visits.
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.