Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38888805›Full record

ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2024

Low vision aids provision in an urban setting in Germany between 2014 and 2017: a regional population based study with healthcare claims data.

M L Stolwijk, I Meyer, S L van der Pas, J W R Twisk, R M A van Nispen, G H M B van Rens

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

M L StolwijkAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Ophthalmology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.stolwijk@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2816-0156
I MeyerPMV Research Group, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
S L van der PasAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J W R TwiskAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
R M A van NispenAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Ophthalmology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
G H M B van RensAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Ophthalmology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Visio Foundation Visio Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLittle is known about the utilization of low vision services (LVS) in Germany. To understand which persons and how often these services would be utilized, this study aimed to investigate low vision aids (LVAs) provision in an urban setting and to describe user characteristics and trends in their characteristics.

methodsA retrospective study based on a population-based healthcare claims database in Cologne (N = ~ 500,000), Germany. The study population comprised individuals, who were continuously insured at four large statutory health insurers and who redeemed a prescription for visual aids or aids for blindness between January 2014 and December 2017. We examined their socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Trends in characteristics were examined with logistic and linear regression models over time.

resultsOut of ~ 500,000 persons, 781 unique individuals (~ 0.2%) redeemed an LVA prescription. They were mainly female (68.7%), 60 years or older (75.3%) and had macular degeneration (50.6%) and/or glaucoma (25.9%). In the working-age subgroup, 33.8% were employed. Visual aids were most often prescribed (74.1%) and of all types of LVAs, individuals most commonly redeemed a prescription for magnifiers (35.8%), screen readers (34.3%) and/or canes (17.1%). Of the entire study population, 75.4% received their prescription from an ophthalmologist, 5.3% from a general practitioner and 7.1% from other medical specialists. Significant trends in characteristics of individuals who redeemed an LVA prescription were not found.

conclusionsBetween 2014 and 2017, 781 individuals in Cologne redeemed an LVA prescription. They had characteristics which mostly can be explained by the epidemiology of VI. Results indicate that individuals that redeemed LVAs have a magnification requirement of ≥ 1.5-fold and ≥ 6-fold. Furthermore, next to ophthalmologists, general practitioners and other medical specialists seem to play a role in LVA provision as well, which should be taken into account by policy makers when planning interventions for increasing LVS provision. Our findings provide a starting point to examine LVS provision in Germany.

Indexed as

Urban PopulationVision, LowAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolDatabases, FactualFemaleGermanyHumansInfantInsurance Claim ReviewMaleMiddle AgedHealthcare claims dataLow vision aidsLow vision rehabilitationVisual impairment

Identifiers

PMID38888805
PMCPMC11584433

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.