ArticlePloS one2025
Trends in self-reported dilated eye examinations among diabetic adults in California from 2011 to 2021.
Article in PloS one, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although prior studies have documented disparities in eye care utilization by age, race/ethnicity, sex, and socioeconomic status, limited research has tracked long-term trends within the diabetic population in California, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to estimate the 11-year secular trend in eye care utilization among adult diabetic patients in California, USA. This was a secondary analysis of public-use data from the California Health Interview Survey (CHIS), an annual population-based survey in California conducted from 2011 to 2021. CHIS samples a representative portion of the California population, with over 20,000 adults in each survey cycle. Data analyses were conducted from January 2023 to April 2024. The primary outcome was the weighted percentage of diabetic adults who reported undergoing a dilated eye exam within the past year. Survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the association between sociodemographic risk factors and the outcome. The prevalence of recent dilated eye exams declined by 8.3% (95% confidence interval -- CI: 4.7%-11.8%; P < 0.0001) in the two years following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021) compared to the two years prior (2018-2019) among adults with diabetes in California. This decline was more pronounced among adults aged ≥ 60 years (P = 0.040 for age interaction) and was limited to urban residents (P = 0.030 for interaction with geographic area). However, it did not disproportionately affect Hispanic or Black Americans (P = 0.71 for race/ethnicity interaction). In conclusion, eye care utilization among the diabetic adults in California declined significantly from 2018-2019-2020-2021, a trend largely attributable to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
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.