ArticleActa ophthalmologica2023
Cost reduction in screening for retinopathy of prematurity in the Netherlands by comparing different screening strategies.
Article in Acta ophthalmologica, 2023. 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.
- Early Prediction Model for Retinopathy of Prematurity Using Placental and Neonatal Risk Factors.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Machine learning-based individualized prediction: risk assessment of retinopathy in preterm infants at high altitude.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Optimizing retinopathy of prematurity screening in China using a single objective criterion: a 10-year retrospective analysis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Cost reduction in screening for retinopathy of prematurity in the Netherlands by comparing different screening strategies.Acta ophthalmologica · 2023Article
- Tailoring Screening Guidelines for Retinopathy of Prematurity in Egypt: An Exploratory Multicentric Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeEvaluate possibilities to reduce the number of infants screened for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) and investigate costs and number of infants detected of current and alternative screening strategies in the Netherlands.
methodsProspective population-based study including clinical data from all infants born in 2017 and referred for ROP screening (NEDROP-2 study). Cost and effects of screening strategies were evaluated that differed on the criteria gestational age (GA), birth weight (BW) and presence of one or more specific risk factor(s) (RF): mechanical ventilation, sepsis, necrotizing enterocolitis, postnatal corticoids and/or hypotension treated with inotropic agents. RF obtained from the Dutch perinatal registry (Perined).
resultsOf the possible efficient strategies, the annual costs varied from €137 966 (inclusion of BW < 700, 63 infants eligible for screening, detection of 17/39 treated ROP) to €492 689 (GA < 30 weeks and BW < 1250 grams, together with infants with GA 30-32 and BW 1250-1500 grams with presence of one more RF, 744 infants eligible for screening, all treated infants detected). Total annual costs of the current Dutch guideline that detects all infants that need treatment for ROP amount to €552 143).
conclusionThe current Dutch ROP guideline can be improved by implementing new screening inclusion criteria. The most effective strategy detecting all severe and treated infants, reduces the number of screened infants by 24% compared to the current guideline and the overall annual costs by €59454.
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.