ArticleBMJ open quality2025
Identifying facilitators, barriers and areas of opportunity in diabetic retinopathy screening: quality improvement through qualitative methods.
Article in BMJ open quality, 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.
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveQuality improvement efforts have aimed to improve annual diabetic retinopathy screening at our institution, but rates remain well below goal. To better understand facilitators, barriers and operational issues unique to our health system and to develop a comprehensive understanding of the care pathway, the Patient Voice toolkit was applied.
methodsIn-depth interviews were conducted individually with patients and care team members in a large urban academic medical centre with multiple satellite community clinics. Interviews with patients focused on facilitators and barriers to annual diabetic retinopathy screening. These interviews were transcribed and organised into discrete codes to identify initial themes. We interviewed clinic staff involved in diabetic retinopathy examination scheduling, execution or quality assurance. Interviews with care team members focused on training materials, camera operations and workflow.
resultsThrough analysis of 15 patient interviews, we found that facilitators included internal motivation, automated examination reminders, reminders from providers and utilisation of local optometry offices. Barriers included competing demands, distant retinal camera locations, limited appointment access and financial and insurance issues. Interviews with 13 care team members resulted in the creation of a process map, and areas of opportunity were identified in the training and operational workflows.
conclusionsThe inclusion of different stakeholder perspectives provides in-depth insight into facilitators and barriers to completing annual diabetic retinopathy screening, allowing for recommendations tailored to our specific health system and operations. Suggested operational improvements include expanding clinics that can perform this examination, increasing appointment flexibility, partnering with local optometry clinics and enhancing annual examination reminders to include more details about the examination. Recommendations suggested by staff include increasing patient education, setting expectations around the examination and implementing real-time feedback on image quality.
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.