Observational studyIndian journal of ophthalmology2021
Analysis of the parental satisfaction for retinopathy of prematurity screening using binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy versus wide field retinal imaging.
Observational study in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends in Neonatal Ophthalmic Screening Methods.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Value of Combining Optical Coherence Tomography with Fundus Photography in Screening Retinopathy in Patients with High Myopia.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Article
- Commentary: Wide-field imaging vs binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy in retinopathy of prematurity screening: Real-world advantages.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Analysis of the parental satisfaction for retinopathy of prematurity screening using binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy versus wide field retinal imaging. Methods: This was an observational, questionnaire survey-based study. The study cohort comprised of parents/legal guardians of consecutive Asian Indian premature infants enrolled for retinopathy of prematurity screening (for infants less than 2000 gms and/or 34-weeks gestational age) using binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy (BIO) with scleral depression and b) wide field retinal imaging using the 3Nethra Neo Camera (Forus Health, India). We evaluated the retina for the presence or absence of stages of ROP and plus disease. The survey analysis used closed-ended (multiple-choice) and open-ended questions for assessing 1) parents' experience/preference among the two screening modalities namely, BIO and wide field imaging used in the study, 2) knowledge prior to ROP screening, 3) knowledge gained post ROP screening, in the outpatient ophthalmologic care unit in our hospital. Results: Parents/legal guardians of 90 infants were included in the study. Among the 90 parents who filled in the questionnaire, 62.3% were referred by their pediatrician, 23.3% came for self check-up and 14.4% incidentally came to the hospital for complaints like ocular discharge and were screened. 93.3% parents were satisfied with either ROP screening modality in our study, with 54.4% stated a preference for retinal imaging. In the study 20% of the parents felt that retinal imaging was painful for the infant and 31.1% felt that BIO was painful for the infant. Conclusion: Wide field imaging is increasingly becoming an effective tool and screening tool in ROP screening and helps in better understanding of the disease amongst parents.
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.