ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Two-stage diagnostic intervals in diabetic retinopathy and associated factors: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo characterize two stage-specific diagnostic intervals in diabetic retinopathy (DR) and examine factors associated with each stage.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, 283 patients newly diagnosed with DR were enrolled. We evaluated two intervals: Phase 1, from diabetes diagnosis to ocular symptom onset (pre-symptomatic interval), and Phase 2, from symptom onset to first DR diagnosis (symptom-to-diagnosis interval). We grouped Phase 1 as < 10 years versus ≥ 10 years and Phase 2 as ≤ 6 months versus > 6 months. Candidate variables were assessed in univariate analyses and entered into multivariable logistic regression as appropriate.
resultsOverall, 62.5% of patients had a Phase 1 interval of ≥ 10 years, and 69.6% received a DR diagnosis within ≤ 6 months after symptom onset (Phase 2). In multivariable analyses, the Phase 1 interval category was independently associated with right-eye logMAR BCVA at diagnosis, HbA1c at diagnosis, DR stage, age at diabetes onset, and occupation. A longer Phase 2 interval (> 6 months) was associated with poorer self-perceived visual function and living with adult children rather than a spouse.
conclusionFactors associated with the two diagnostic intervals differed across stages, supporting a stage-specific interpretation of the DR diagnostic pathway. Phase 1 was primarily associated with clinical characteristics at diagnosis, whereas Phase 2 was more closely associated with patient-reported visual function and family context. These findings highlight the importance of proactive retinal screening before symptom onset and suggest that optimizing referral pathways and family-supported healthcare seeking may facilitate earlier diagnosis after symptoms emerge.
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.