ArticleEye (London, England)2024
Implementing teleophthalmology services to improve cost-effectiveness of the national eye care system.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tele-Ophthalmology for Retinal Health Surveillance in Denmark.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Review
- Home-Based Visual Field Monitoring for Open-Angle Glaucoma Using a Web-Enabled Quantitative Perimeter (Perimouse): An Evaluation Over Six Months.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Teleophthalmology adoption and perceived barriers among Colombian general practitioners: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Sustaining Ophthalmic Practices for the Future: A High-Value Care Approach to Environmental Responsibility.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Review
- The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Tele-ophthalmology-Based Retinal Screening.Ophthalmology and therapy · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeOptometrist-assisted and teleophthalmology-enabled referral pathway (OTRP) for community optometry referrals has the potential to improve the capacity and efficiency of eye care delivery systems through risk stratification and limiting the number of improved referrals. This study investigates the expected future costs and benefits of implementing OTRP under various possible organizational set-ups relevant to a Danish context.
methodsA decision-analytic model (decision tree) with a one-year time horizon was constructed to portray alternative future patient referral pathways for people examined in optometry stores for suspected ocular posterior segment eye disease. The main outcomes were total healthcare costs per patient, average waiting time from eye examination in store until the start of treatment or end of referral pathway, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained. The economic evaluation compares the general ophthalmologist referral pathway (GO-RP) with a potential reimbursement model for the optometrist-assisted teleophthalmology referral pathways (R-OTRP) and a procurement model for the optometrist-assisted teleophthalmology referral pathways (P-OTRP).
resultsThe cost per individual with suspected ocular posterior segment eye disease was estimated to be £116 for GO-RP and £75 and £94 for P-OTRP and R-OTRP respectively. The average waiting time for diagnosis or end of referral pathway was 25 weeks for GO-RP and 5.8 and 5.7 for P-OTPR and R-OTPR respectively. QALY gain was 0.15 for P-OTRP/R-OTRP compared to 0.06 for GO-RP.
conclusionOTRP is effective in reducing unnecessary referrals and waiting times, increasing patients' HRQoL, and decreasing the costs of diagnosing individuals with suspected ocular posterior segment eye disease.
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.