Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39699904›Full record

ArticleJAMA ophthalmology2025

Quantifying Patient Preferences and Expectations About Diabetic Retinopathy Monitoring.

Juan Marcos Gonzalez Sepulveda, Jui-Chen Yang, Alicja Mastylak, Elaine M Wells-Gray, Landon Grace, Stephen Fransen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA ophthalmology, 2025. 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. Do Patient Preferences and Treatment Beliefs Explain Patterns of Antihypertensive Medication Nonadherence? A Discrete Choice Experiment.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026
    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.

Juan Marcos Gonzalez SepulvedaDuke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina.
Jui-Chen YangDuke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina.
Alicja MastylakDuke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina.
Elaine M Wells-GrayLumata Health, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
Landon GraceLumata Health, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
Stephen FransenLumata Health, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

Funding

Optimizing population health outcomes in diabetic retinopathy through personalized and scalable screening strategiesR44EY033251 · NEI · RETINAL CARE, INC. · PI WELLS-GRAY, ELAINE · 2021 to 2022
$1.6M
NEI NIH HHS R44 EY033251
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the leading cause of blindness among adults in the US. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends annual DR monitoring for all individuals with diabetes, yet monitoring rates remain below 70%. Objective: To evaluate how patient preferences and expectations about DR monitoring are associated with expected monitoring adherence behaviors. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this survey study, a web-enabled survey instrument was developed and implemented with a discrete-choice experiment to characterize patient preferences for outcomes of DR monitoring and graded-pair questions to quantify patients' expectations about the impact of DR monitoring on blindness risk. The survey was conducted through ResearchMatch, a US National Institutes of Health-developed online platform, among adults with self-reported, physician-diagnosed diabetes. Recruitment occurred between September 15, 2023, and October, 17, 2023, and data analysis occurred between October 2023 and December 2023. Results from the 2 tasks were combined to derive patients' expected monitoring behavior following a recently proposed treatment adherence framework. The survey instrument was pretested in cognitive interviews and validated for the purposes of this study. Exposure: Survey-based discrete-choice experiment and graded-pair questions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participants' relative preferences for DR-related blindness risk reductions, monitoring time, and out-of-pocket monitoring costs were quantified, as well as the degree to which participants expected adherence to monitoring to affect the risk of blindness. By combining how much participants valued specific reductions in blindness risk (relative to monitoring costs) and their expected risk reduction through monitoring, the rate at which patients would maximize the benefit of monitoring appointments was assessed. Results: The survey was completed satisfactorily by 304 respondents of 542 individuals invited to participate. Mean (SD) respondent age was 40.5 (11.2) years, and 169 respondents (56.1%) were female. Reductions in blindness risk were valuable to participants. Participants required a 3.87 (95% CI, 1.91-5.88) percentage-point reduction in 5-year blindness risk to be fully adherent to an annual 53-minute monitoring visit with a $26 co-payment, but respondents expected DR monitoring to reduce the 5-year blindness risk by 0.71 (95% CI, 0.21-1.28) percentage points. Conclusions and Relevance: In this online survey study among adults with diabetes, measurement of patient preferences and expectations about DR monitoring with properly validated instruments offered an opportunity to assess patient health behaviors. The association between preferences and monitoring expectations was generally consistent with monitoring nonadherence among adults with diabetes and offers insights that may help address inconsistent DR monitoring.

Indexed as

Diabetic RetinopathyPatient CompliancePatient PreferenceAdultAgedBlindnessFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID39699904
PMCPMC11842207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.