ArticleBMJ open2025
Impact of a community-based asynchronous review clinic on appointment attendance delays across an eye hospital network in London, UK: an interrupted time series analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Patient and staff experiences of a community-based diagnostic clinic for chronic eye conditions: Qualitative analysis.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the impact of opening a large community-based asynchronous review ophthalmic clinic on attendance delays among patients with stable chronic eye disease attending a London teaching eye hospital network.
designInterrupted time-series analysis of routine electronic health records of appointment attendances.
settingA large eye hospital network with facilities across London, UK, between June 2018 and April 2023.
participantsWe analysed 69 257 attendances from 39 357 patients, with glaucoma and medical retina accounting for 62% (n=42 982) and 38% (n=26 275) of visits, respectively. Patients over 65 made up 54% (n=37 824) of attendances, while 53% (n=37 014) were from the more deprived half of the population, and 51% (n=35 048) were males.
interventionAn asynchronous review clinic opened in a shopping centre in London, in autumn 2021, following the COVID-19 lockdown in spring 2020.
main outcome measuresAverage attendance delays (days), calculated as the difference between follow-up attendance date and the latest clinically appropriate date determined at the preceding attendance.
resultsPre-COVID-19, attendance delays for chronic eye disease monitoring were increasing by 0.9 days per week (95% CI, 0.8 to 0.9) on average, worsening to 2.0 days per week (95% CI, 2.0 to 2.0) after the first COVID-19 national lockdown, mid-March 2020. Opening the asynchronous review clinic increased appointment capacity, with delays decreasing on average by 8.1 days per week (95% CI, 8.1 to 8.2) shortly after opening. The rate of decrease slowed to 0.3 days per week (95% CI, 0.3 to 0.3) after 5 months. We found no significant differences in average attendance delays by age, gender or level of deprivation.
conclusionThe asynchronous review clinic significantly reduced attendance delays across the hospital network, addressing pre-existing backlog for stable chronic eye diseases. The reduction appeared to be maintained after the initial backlog had been cleared.
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.