ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2021
Pitfalls of Advanced Retinopathy of Prematurity Presentation: A Content Analysis of Medical Records.
Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Retinopathy of Prematurity as Multidisciplinary Approach, a Pediatricians Standpoint, and Practice.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2022Article
- Saudi Arabian retinopathy of prematurity national telemedicine program: Achievements and challenges.Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological SocietyArticle
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 at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo identify the pitfalls in retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening leading to advanced disease at Ministry of Health (MOH) hospitals in Saudi Arabia.
methodsA qualitative deductive content analysis was used to study the phenomena of defects in ROP screening. A retrospective review of medical records of newborns presenting to two tertiary eye care centers with advanced ROP (stage 4 and 5) from January 2012 to June 2019 was completed. An extensive review of the original files at the referring hospitals was conducted, including the general condition and findings of ophthalmic examination and the sequence of follow-up until the infant was discharged/referred. Data analysis was completed using pre-structured categorization matrix.
resultsRecords of 29 infants with advanced stage ROP were identified. Only 13 medical records were available and obtained. The pitfalls in screening found in the study were failure to refer by the neonatologist, delayed follow-up by the ophthalmologist, failure to follow-up by the ophthalmologist, failure to diagnose by the ophthalmologist, poor documentation in patient files, unavailability of ophthalmologist, family negligence, lack of treatment and delayed referral to a higher center, and progression despite timely screening and management.
conclusionAlthough clear ROP screening guidelines are available, implementations of these guidelines are suboptimal. This study showed that the most common defect in screening is physician's inadequacy and unavailability. A proper network of competent ROP screening physicians in all neonatal intensive care units should be established. Centers for advanced ROP surgery should be allocated to deliver a timely surgical care if needed.
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.