ArticleActa diabetologica2023
A cohort follow-up study for diabetic retinopathy screening incidence in the North Denmark Region.
Article in Acta diabetologica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolution of ophthalmological care in adult with diabetes in France between 2010 and 2022: a nationwide study.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening incidence in a universal healthcare system.
methodsRegistry-based cohort study based on a Danish regional population from 2009 to 2018. Individuals with diabetes were identified by medication. Screening attendance was estimated by surrogate measures using local and nationwide databases reported by cumulative incidence.
results18,832 patients were included. By the end of the first year, the cumulative incidence of screening for DR was 60.2% and by the end of the second year 74.2%. The cumulative incidence was 93.9% overall, 97.7% for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and 93.4% for patients with type 2 diabetes. Screening proportions per 1, 2 and 5 years were calculated. Females, patients with T1D, and patients attending screening at hospitals had a higher Hazard Ratio of 1.084, 1.157, and 1.573, respectively. The Cochran-Armitage trend test indicated increased screening frequency from 2009 to 2018. Validation of DR screening was done at hospitals with a mean positive predictive value of 86.78%. Cumulative incidence curves showed a small right shift when censoring the first, second and third screening visits.
conclusionsNearly all patients were screened for DR over a 5-year timespan. Female patients with T1D who attended screening at hospitals were significantly more likely to be screened. Validation of screening visits at hospitals was reported with a high mean positive predictive value. Most other studies, to the best of our knowledge, only report screening attendance for patients already enrolled in a DR screening programme. This study describes the overall screening attendance for the total eligible diabetes population.
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.