ArticleSurvey of ophthalmology
A scoping review of patients' barriers to eye care for glaucoma and keratitis.
Article in Survey of ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient and Neighborhood Factors Influencing Glaucoma Medication Adherence.Journal of glaucoma · 2026Article
- Ophthalmological care delivery in East Kazakhstan: a qualitative study of ophthalmologists on system barriers and service organization.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Complexity and Barriers to Vision Care: A Narrative Review Informed by a Mobile Eye Program.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
- Quality of Care in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Glaucoma.JAMA ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Psychometric Evaluation of the German Version of the Perceived Access to Healthcare Questionnaire in a Sample of Individuals with Rare Chronic Diseases.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Beyond Accessibility in Exploring Access to Eye Care to Achieve Vision Health Equity.JAMA ophthalmology · 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In this scoping review, we examine underlying causes of loss to follow-up for chronic (glaucoma) and acute (corneal ulcers) eye conditions using the Penchansky and Thomas access to care framework. We explore barriers by World Health Organization income levels and by studying geographical location. We identified 6,363 abstracts, with 75 articles retrieved and 16 meeting inclusion criteria. One article discussed barriers to follow-up care for people with corneal ulcers, and the other 15 were for people with glaucoma. The most frequent barriers to care were affordability, awareness, and accessibility. The international studies had a greater percentage of studies report acceptability as a barrier to loss to follow-up. Countries with universal healthcare included affordability as a loss to follow-up barrier, emphasizing that cost goes beyond the ability to pay for direct treatment costs. Understanding and addressing barriers to follow-up care can aid the goal of continued care and decrease the risk of poor outcomes and vision loss.
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.