ArticleDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2025
Recognition of ophthalmology consultation and fundus examination among individuals with diabetes in Japan: A cross-sectional study using claims-questionnaire linked data.
Article in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Recognition of ophthalmology consultation and fundus examination among individuals with diabetes in Japan: A cross-sectional study using claims-questionnaire linked data.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThis study aimed to assess the relationship between individuals' recognition of ophthalmology consultation recommendations, their knowledge of the recommended frequency of diabetic retinopathy screening, and the likelihood of undergoing fundus examinations. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis cross-sectional secondary analysis linked claims and health checkup data to a questionnaire survey. Questionnaires were distributed to randomly sampled National Health Insurance beneficiaries in Tsukuba City, using data from claims and health checkups. Weighting was applied based on sample extraction and response rates. We calculated the proportions of fundus examinations and knowledge of screening frequency according to the recognition of ophthalmology consultation recommendations. The association between visits to medical facilities with diabetes specialists and diabetic retinopathy screening was also examined.
resultsAmong 290 participants, 47.6% recognized ophthalmology consultation recommendations. Those who recognized these recommendations had better knowledge of the screening frequency (93.4% vs. 49.6%) and were more likely to undergo fundus examinations (72.9% vs. 30.1%; adjusted risk ratio 2.36; 95% CI, 1.65-3.38). Participants who visited medical facilities with diabetes specialists were more likely to recognize recommendations, have knowledge of screening frequency, and undergo fundus examinations.
conclusionsRecognition of ophthalmology consultation recommendations was associated with better knowledge of screening frequency and higher participation in fundus examinations. Increasing awareness through healthcare provider recommendations may improve diabetic retinopathy screening rates, highlighting the need for targeted interventions to promote eye care among individuals with diabetes.
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.