ArticlePLOS global public health2023
Uptake of diabetic retinopathy screening at a secondary level facility in Malawi.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. 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, 1 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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a common microvascular complication of long-standing diabetes mellitus (DM). DR screening is a cost-effective intervention for preventing blindness from DR. We conducted a cross-sectional study to investigate the uptake and the predictors of uptake of annual DR screening in an opportunistic DR screening programme at a secondary-level diabetes clinic in Southern Malawi. Consecutive patients were interviewed using a structured questionnaire to record their demographic characteristics, medical details and data regarding; the frequency of clinic visits, knowledge of existence of DR screening services and a history of referral for DR screening in the prior one year. Univariate binary logistic regression was used to investigate predictors of DR screening uptake over the prior one year. Explanatory variables that had a P-value of < 0.1 were included into a multivariate logistic regression model. All variables that had a p-value of <0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. We recruited 230 participants over three months with a median age of 52.5 years (IQR 18-84) and a median duration of diabetes of 4 years (IQR 1-7). The average interval of clinic visits was 1.2 months (SD ± 0.43) and only 59.1% (n = 139) of the participants were aware of the existence of diabetic retinopathy screening services at the facility. The uptake for DR screening over one year was 20% (n = 46). The strongest predictors of uptake on univariate analysis were awareness of the existence of DR screening services (OR 10.05, P <0.001) and a history of being referred for DR screening (OR 9.02, P <0.001) and these remained significant on multivariable analysis. Interventions to improve uptake for DR screening should promote referral of patients for DR screening and strengthen knowledge about the need and availability of DR screening services.
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.