Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38971860›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

A health economic pilot study comparing two diabetic retinopathy screening strategies.

Ellen Steffenssen Sauesund, Silvia N W Hertzberg, Øystein Kalsnes Jørstad, Morten Carstens Moe, Maja Gran Erke, Dag Sigurd Fosmark, Goran Petrovski

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Ellen Steffenssen SauesundDepartment of Ophthalmology, Oslo University Hospital, 0450, Oslo, Norway. ellen.s.sauesund@gmail.com.
Silvia N W HertzbergDepartment of Ophthalmology, Oslo University Hospital, 0450, Oslo, Norway.
Øystein Kalsnes JørstadDepartment of Ophthalmology, Oslo University Hospital, 0450, Oslo, Norway.
Morten Carstens MoeDepartment of Ophthalmology, Oslo University Hospital, 0450, Oslo, Norway.
Maja Gran ErkeDepartment of Ophthalmology, Oslo University Hospital, 0450, Oslo, Norway.
Dag Sigurd Fosmark *Department of Ophthalmology, Oslo University Hospital, 0450, Oslo, Norway.
Goran Petrovski *Department of Ophthalmology, Oslo University Hospital, 0450, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To compare two screening strategies for diabetic retinopathy (DR), and to determine the health-economic impact of including optical coherence tomography (OCT) in a regular DR screening. This cross-sectional study included a cohort of patients (≥ 18 years) with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus (T1D or T2D) from a pilot DR screening program at Oslo University Hospital, Norway. A combined screening strategy where OCT was performed in addition to fundus photography for all patients, was conducted on this cohort and compared to our existing sequential screening strategy. In the sequential screening strategy, OCT was performed on a separate day only if fundus photography indicated diabetic macular edema (DME). The presence of diabetic maculopathy on fundus photography and DME on OCT was determined by two medical retina specialists. Based on the prevalence rate of diabetic maculopathy and DME from the pilot, we determined the health-economic impact of the two screening strategies. The study included 180 eyes of 90 patients. Twenty-seven eyes of 18 patients had diabetic maculopathy, and of these, 7 eyes of 6 patients revealed DME on OCT. When diabetic maculopathy was absent on fundus photographs, OCT could not reveal DME. Accordingly, 18 patients (20%) with diabetic maculopathy would have needed an additional examination with OCT in the sequential screening strategy, 6 (33%) of whom would have had DME on OCT. In an extended healthcare perspective analysis, the cost of the sequential screening strategy was higher than the cost of the combined screening strategy. There was a weak association between diabetic maculopathy on fundus photography and DME on OCT. The health economic analysis suggests that including OCT as a standard test in DR screening could potentially be cost-saving.

Indexed as

Diabetic RetinopathyMass ScreeningTomography, Optical CoherenceAdultAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisCross-Sectional StudiesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHumansMacular EdemaMaleMiddle AgedNorwayPilot ProjectsCost-savingsDiabetic macular edemaDiabetic maculopathyDiabetic retinopathyOCTScreening

Identifiers

PMID38971860
PMCPMC11227515

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.