ArticlePloS one2021
Effect of deprivation and ethnicity on primary macula-on retinal detachment repair success rate and clinical outcomes: A study of 568 patients.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of the COVID-19 associated United Kingdom lockdown on physical activity in older adults at high risk of cardiovascular disease: a mixed methods perspective from the MedEx-UK multicenter trial.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Measures of multiple deprivation and visual field loss in glaucoma clinics in England: lessons from big data.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- The impact of 360-laser barricade on outcomes of vitrectomy for pseudophakic retinal detachment; The Manchester Pseudophakic Retinal Detachment Study.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- The use of fluorinated gases and quantification of carbon emission for common vitreoretinal procedures.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- Socioeconomic disadvantage and impact on visual outcomes in patients with viral retinitis and retinal detachment.Journal of ophthalmic inflammation and infection · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSocio-economic deprivation and ethnic variation have been frequently linked to poorer health outcomes. We collected a large series of primary macula-on rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) cases and analysed the effect of socio-economic deprivation and ethnicity on both six-month retinal re-detachment rate and visual outcomes. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective consecutive case series of 568 patients attending Birmingham and Midlands Eye Centre from January 2017-2020. Multiple Indices of Deprivation (IMD) deciles were used for deprivation status and split to two groups: IMD-A (Decile 1-5) and IMD-B (Decile 6-10). The two largest subgroups of ethnicities were compared, White and South Asians (SA).
resultsWe report an overall retinal re-detachment rate of 8.5%. IMD-A re-detached significantly more than IMD-B (11.2% vs 6.0% respectively, p = 0.034). No statistical significance was found between White and SA re-detachment rate (9.1% and 5.6% respectively, p = 0.604). SA median age significantly lower at 49 years (IQR: 37-61) compared to White patients at 57 years (IQR: 50-65) (p = <0.001). IMD-A median age of 55 years (IQR: 46-64) was significantly lower to IMD-B median age of 58 years (IQR: 51-65) (p = 0.011). No differences in final visual outcomes were detected across all groups.
conclusionWe demonstrated an increased retinal re-detachment rate in our more deprived patients according to IMD and a younger cohort of SA compared to White ethnicity. Further prospective studies are required to demonstrate the link between socio-economic deprivation and surgical success.
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.