ArticleOman journal of ophthalmology
Referral patterns and screening outcomes for diabetic retinopathy in a secondary care center in Oman.
Article in Oman journal of ophthalmology. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDiabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of vision loss globally, and its burden is increasing, particularly in regions with a high prevalence of diabetes like Oman. Early detection and timely intervention are crucial for preventing vision loss and improving patient outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate referral patterns and screening outcomes for DR at Bowsher Specialized Polyclinics (BSP) in Muscat, Oman. METHODOLOGY: In this cross-sectional study conducted between January 1 and December 31, 2023, data were retrospectively collected from the electronic health records of 6677 patients referred to BSP. The assessment included referral sources, reasons for referral, patient demographics, waiting times, screening results, and follow-up plans.
resultsA high proportion of external referrals (79%), with 90.6% being routine. Nearly half of the referrals were for DR screening, and among those screened, 16.9% had abnormal findings, with mild nonproliferative DR (NPDR) being the most prevalent. Males showed a significantly higher proportion of abnormal screening outcomes. In addition, mean waiting times were long (145.8 days), and 39.5% of patients were defaulters.
conclusionsThese findings highlight the need for targeted interventions to optimize referral pathways, expand screening capacity, and enhance patient engagement to improve DR management.
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.