Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39378098›Full record

ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2024

Patient-Centered Economic Burden of Diabetic Macular Edema: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Kyungseon Choi, Sang Jun Park, Hyuna Yoon, Seoyoon Choi, Yongseok Mun, Seok Kim, Sooyoung Yoo, Se Joon Woo, Kyu Hyung Park, Junghyun Na and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Recent advances in the study of Conbercept for diabetic macular edema.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2025
    Review
  10. Patient Centered Outcomes Research in Medical Toxicology.Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

11 authors.

Kyungseon Choi *Department of Regulatory Science, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6616-6842
Sang Jun Park *Department of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0542-2758
Hyuna YoonDepartment of Regulatory Science, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5867-2788
Seoyoon ChoiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0009-0009-0621-6412
Yongseok MunDepartment of Ophthalmology, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0123-0361
Seok KimHealthcare ICT Research Center, Office of eHealth Research and Businesses, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-4996-8613
Sooyoung YooHealthcare ICT Research Center, Office of eHealth Research and Businesses, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-8620-4925
Se Joon WooDepartment of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3692-7169
Kyu Hyung ParkDepartment of Ophthalmology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-5516-8121
Junghyun NaDepartment of Regulatory Science, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0009-0002-5875-1125
Hae Sun SuhDepartment of Regulatory Science, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3445-6607

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiabetic macular edema (DME), a leading cause of blindness, requires treatment with costly drugs, such as anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) agents. The prolonged use of these effective but expensive drugs results in an incremental economic burden for patients with DME compared with those with diabetes mellitus (DM) without DME. However, there are no studies on the long-term patient-centered economic burden of DME after reimbursement for anti-VEGFs.

objectiveThis retrospective cohort study aims to estimate the 3-year patient-centered economic burden of DME compared with DM without DME, using the Common Data Model.

methodsWe used medical data from 1,903,603 patients (2003-2020), transformed and validated using the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model from Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. We defined the group with DME as patients aged >18 years with nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy and intravitreal anti-VEGF or steroid prescriptions. As control, we defined the group with DM without DME as patients aged >18 years with DM or diabetic retinopathy without intravitreal anti-VEGF or steroid prescriptions. Propensity score matching, performed using a regularized logistic regression with a Laplace prior, addressed selection bias. We estimated direct medical costs over 3 years categorized into total costs, reimbursement costs, nonreimbursement costs, out-of-pocket costs, and costs covered by insurance, as well as healthcare resource utilization. An exponential conditional model and a count model estimated unbiased incremental patient-centered economic burden using generalized linear models and a zero-inflation model.

resultsIn a cohort of 454 patients with DME matched with 1640 patients with DM, the economic burden of DME was significantly higher than that of DM, with total costs over 3 years being 2.09 (95% CI 1.78-2.47) times higher. Reimbursement costs were 1.89 (95% CI 1.57-2.28) times higher in the group with DME than with the group with DM, while nonreimbursement costs were 2.54 (95% CI 2.12-3.06) times higher. Out-of-pocket costs and costs covered by insurance were also higher by a factor of 2.11 (95% CI 1.58-2.59) and a factor of 2.01 (95% CI 1.85-2.42), respectively. Patients with DME had a significantly higher number of outpatient (1.87-fold) and inpatient (1.99-fold) visits compared with those with DM (P<.001 in all cases).

conclusionsPatients with DME experience a heightened economic burden compared with diabetic patients without DME. The substantial and enduring economic impact observed in real-world settings underscores the need to alleviate patients' burden through preventive measures, effective management, appropriate reimbursement policies, and the development of innovative treatments. Strategies to mitigate the economic impact of DME should include proactive approaches such as expanding anti-VEGF reimbursement criteria, approving and reimbursing cost-effective drugs such as bevacizumab, advocating for proactive eye examinations, and embracing early diagnosis by ophthalmologists facilitated by cutting-edge methodologies such as artificial intelligence for patients with DM.

Indexed as

Cost of IllnessDiabetic RetinopathyMacular EdemaAdultAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient-Centered CareRepublic of KoreaRetrospective StudiesVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AVascular Endothelial Growth Factor Acost of illnessdiabetic macular edemaeconomic burdenObservational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Modelpatient-centered careretrospective cohort study

Identifiers

PMID39378098
PMCPMC11496919

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.