ArticleCureus2025
Effective Cataract Surgical Coverage in a Rural Area of North India.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWorldwide, only 17% of individuals affected by blindness and visual impairment have received access to quality cataract surgery. The primary objective of this study was to determine the Cataract Surgical Coverage (CSC) and the effective Cataract Surgical Coverage (eCSC) among older adults aged 50 years and above.
methodsThis community-based cross-sectional study was conducted among older adults in two blocks of Jhajjar district, Haryana. A total of 34 villages were selected based on probability proportionate to size. During Phase 1, house-to-house screening and referral of individuals with visual acuity less than 6/12 were conducted. Phase 2 involved visual acuity assessment and lens examination in a makeshift clinic. CSC (persons) and eCSC (persons) were calculated using the standard formula for three visual impairment cut-offs: less than 6/18, less than 6/60, and less than 3/60.
resultsOf the 2025 older adults surveyed, 1544 were referred to the makeshift clinic, and complete lens status data were available for 1420 participants. The CSC (persons) rates were 72.2% (95% CI: 69.9 to 74.5), 83.1% (95% CI: 81.2 to 85.0), and 88.0% (95% CI: 86.3 to 89.7), and the eCSC (persons) rates were 43.9% (95% CI: 41.3 to 46.5), 52.3% (95% CI: 49.7 to 54.9), and 55.1% (95% CI: 52.5 to 57.7) for participants with presenting visual acuity less than 6/18, less than 6/60, and less than 3/60, respectively.
conclusionsThe proportions of CSC were found to be higher than those of eCSC in the study area. The lower eCSC suggests that the quality of cataract surgical services may be suboptimal. Further investigation into the quality of surgical services may be required to improve the eCSC.
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.