ArticlePloS one2023
Use of public sector diabetes eye services in New Zealand 2006-2019: Analysis of national routinely collected datasets.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess diabetes eye service use in New Zealand among people aged ≥15 years by estimating service attendance, biennial screening rate, and disparities in the use of screening and treatment services.
methodsWe obtained Ministry of Health data from the National Non-Admitted Patient Collection on diabetes eye service events between 1 July 2006 and 31 December 2019 and sociodemographic and mortality data from the Virtual Diabetes Register and linked these using a unique patient identifier (encrypted National Health Index). We 1) summarized attendance at retinal screening and ophthalmology services, 2) calculated biennial and triennial screening rate, 3) summarized treatment with laser and anti-VEGF and used log-binomial regression to examine associations of all of these with age group, ethnicity, and area-level deprivation.
resultsIn total, 245,844 people aged ≥15 years had at least one diabetes eye service appointment attended or scheduled; half of these (n = 125,821, 51.2%) attended only retinal screening, one-sixth attended only ophthalmology (n = 35,883, 14.6%) and one-third attended both (n = 78,300, 31.8%). The biennial retinal screening rate was 62.1%, with large regional variation (73.9% in Southern District to 29.2% in West Coast). Compared with NZ Europeans, Māori were approximately twice as likely to never receive diabetes eye care or to access ophthalmology when referred from retinal screening, 9% relatively less likely to receive biennial screening and received the fewest anti-VEGF injections when treatment was commenced. Disparities in service access were also present for Pacific Peoples compared to NZ Europeans, younger and older age groups compared to those aged 50-59 years and those living in areas with higher deprivation.
conclusionsAccess to diabetes eye care is suboptimal, with substantial disparity between age groups, ethnicity groups, area level deprivation quintile and across districts. Efforts to improve access to and quality of diabetes eye care services must include strengthening data collection and monitoring.
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.