ArticleOphthalmic epidemiology2024
Recruiting Populations at Higher Risk for Glaucoma and Other Eye Diseases Experiencing Eye Health Disparities.
Article in Ophthalmic epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04271709 (The Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-Up Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 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.
The Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-Up Study (NYC-SIGHT)
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Michigan Screening and Intervention for Glaucoma and Eye Health through Telemedicine Program: Impact on Vision, Follow-up, and Costs.Ophthalmology · 2025Trial
- Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma among Black and Latinx Populations: Exploring Racial Disparities in the United States.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Review
- Eye Care in Federally Qualified Health Centers.Ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Social Determinants of Health and Glaucoma Screening and Detection in the SIGHT Studies.Journal of glaucoma · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe compared recruitment of participants at high risk for glaucoma and other eye diseases in three community-based studies designed to improve access to eye care in underserved populations in New York City, Alabama, and Michigan.
methodsWe used (1) participant data collected at enrollment (e.g. demographic, medical conditions, healthcare access, and method of hearing about study) and (2) interviews with study staff to assess effective recruitment strategies in enrolling people at high risk for eye disease. We analyzed participant data using descriptive statistics and interview data using content analysis to categorize responses to questions.
resultsIn these community-based studies, all sites recruited greater proportions of populations with increased risk of eye disease compared to their estimates in the US population. High-risk characteristics varied based on the setting (i.e. Federally Qualified Health Centers or affordable housing buildings). Older adults represented 35% to 57%; 43% to 56% identified as Black; 1% to 40% as Hispanic/Latino; 20% to 42% reported a family history of glaucoma; 32% to 61% reported diabetes; and 50% to 67% reported high blood pressure. Social risk factors for under-utilization of eye care due to poverty included that 43% to 70% of participants had high school or lower education; 16% to 40% were employed; and 7% and 31% had no health insurance. From a qualitative perspective, active, personalized, culturally sensitive methods were most effective in recruiting participants.
conclusionImplementing eye disease detection interventions in community-based settings facilitated recruiting individuals at high risk for glaucoma and other eye diseases.
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.