ArticleScientific reports2022
Assessment of patient follow-up from student-run free eye clinic to county ophthalmology clinic.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Access to Myopia Care in the United States-A Narrative Review.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Review
- Evaluation and Optimization of Diabetic Retinopathy Screenings for Uninsured Latinx Patients in a Resource-Limited Student-Run Free Clinic.Journal of student-run clinics · 2024Article
- Capabilities and Limitations of Student-Led Free Vision Screening Programs in the United States.Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
- Baseline Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Patients Seen Through the Free Diabetes Screening (FDS) Program.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Practical Tips for Starting a Student-Run Free Eye Clinic.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2024Article
- Predictors of Clinic Attendance After Community-Based Vision Screening.Translational vision science & technology · 2023Article
- Follow-Up Adherence After Community Health Vision Screening Programs: A Review of the Literature.Journal of academic ophthalmology (2017) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Ophthalmology Student Interest Group at Indiana University School of Medicine provides a free student-run eye screening clinic for an underserved community in Indianapolis. Patients with abnormal findings are referred to the ophthalmology service of the local county hospital for further evaluation. This retrospective chart review studied 180 patients referred from our free eye clinic to follow up at the ophthalmology service of a local county hospital from October 2013 to February 2020. This study investigated factors impacting follow-up of patients by analyzing demographics, medical history, insurance coverage, and final diagnoses at follow-up. Thirty-five (19.4%) of 180 patients successfully followed up at the local county hospital with an average time to follow-up of 14.4 (± 15.9) months. Mean patient age was 51 (± 13.6) with nearly equal numbers of males and females. The most common diagnoses at follow-up included refractive error (51.4%), cataract (45.7%), and glaucoma (28.6%). Patients with diabetes diagnoses or Healthy Indiana Plan insurance coverage had increased probability of follow-up. This study reveals gaps in timely follow-up to the local county hospital, demonstrating the current limitations of our free clinic in connecting patients to more definitive care and the need for an improved referral process.
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.