ArticleOman journal of ophthalmology
Comparative evaluation of diabetic retinopathy screening programs in regular ophthalmology clinics versus integrated diabetic clinics within rural health-care services.
Article in Oman journal of ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobust integration of diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening within health systems is essential to prevent DR-related blindness. This, however, remains a challenge in the developing world. The aim of this study was to evaluate two models of DR screening programs within rural general health-care services. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a retrospective observational study from two rural health centers. Demographic and clinical data of patients completing DR screening were analyzed. Patients were screened in regular ophthalmology clinics (ROC) or integrated diabetic clinics (IDC). Referral and treatment completion data were retrieved from the clinical charts at the base hospital.
resultsA total of 2535 DR screenings were conducted for 2296 patients. The total population prevalence for any DR was 14.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 12.8%-15.6%) and vision-threatening DR (VTDR) was 4.7% (95% CI: 3.8%-5.6%). In the ROC and IDC groups, respectively, the prevalence of any DR was 20.4% and 8.2%, VTDR, 7.8% and 1.7%, and blindness, 1.4% and 0.4% (all
conclusionsPatients attending IDCs had a significantly lower prevalence of any DR, VTDR, and blindness demonstrating the advantages of integrated diabetic care in a rural setting. However, referral uptake and DR treatment completion need strengthening.
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.