ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2022
Glaucoma Suspects: The Impact of Risk Factor-Driven Review Periods on Clinical Load, Diagnoses, and Healthcare Costs.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2022. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Utility of optometrist referrals for glaucoma evaluation in a young adult population.Clinical & experimental optometry · 2026Article
- Predicting visual field global and local parameters from OCT measurements using explainable machine learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Clinical Perspectives on the Use of Computer Vision in Glaucoma Screening.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Frontloading visual field tests detect earlier mean deviation progression when applied to real-world-derived early-stage glaucoma data.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2024Article
- [Use of antiglaucomatous drugs in the urban adult population : New Insights into the prevalence of glaucoma from the Hamburg City Health Study].Die Ophthalmologie · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo model the healthcare impact (clinical attendance time and financial cost) and clinical outcomes (glaucoma diagnoses) of different risk factor-driven review frequencies for glaucoma suspect patients up until the point of discharge or diagnosis.
methodsMedical records of 494 glaucoma suspects were examined to extract the clinical diagnosis. Two criteria for review periods were defined, based on contrasting stringency from established clinical guidelines: American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO), more stringent/less frequent; and the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), less stringent/more frequent. We used these data to model patient outcomes and healthcare costs using a Markov model.
resultsThe less stringent/more frequent criterion resulted in more high-risk glaucoma suspects requiring more frequent review compared with the more stringent/less frequent criterion. Across the 15 Markov cycles (7.5 years), the less stringent/more frequent review criterion resulted in 6.6% more diagnoses and fewer overall clinical visits (14.7%) and reduced cost per diagnosis by 12% to 32% (P < 0.0001). The number of glaucoma diagnoses made using each criterion converged at 2.5 to 3 years.
conclusionsThe stringency of risk assessments for glaucoma suspects impacts review periods and therefore clinical load, healthcare costs, and diagnosis rates. Using current testing methods, more frequent review periods appear advantageous for diagnostic efficiency, with both lower clinic load and lower cost up until the point of discharge or glaucoma diagnosis. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: A less stringent criterion for assessing the risk of developing glaucoma potentially offers a more cost-effective method for reviewing glaucoma suspects, especially within the first 2.5 years.
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.