ArticleScientific reports2026
Utilization of eye care services and associated factors among adults with diabetes mellitus attending a tertiary teaching hospital in Northern Uganda.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
Diabetic retinopathy and vascular complications are significant causes of visual impairment with diabetes mellitus (DM), yet eye care service utilization remains low in many low-income settings. We determined eye care service utilization and associated factors among adults with DM attending the Gulu Regional Referral Hospital (GRRH) in Northern Uganda. A hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted from January to November 2024. Adults aged ≥ 18 years were consecutively enrolled. Data were collected using a pre-tested, semi-structured questionnaire administered via face-to-face interviews. Eye care service utilization was evaluated with a single question, “Have you had an eye check-up in the last 5 years?” with Yes/No responses. Multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with eye care utilization. A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Of 419 participants, 196 (46.8%, 95% CI: 42.0%–51.7%) had undergone an eye check-up. The median age was 54 years (IQR: 40–65), with 70.4% (n = 295) female and 94.0% (n = 394) having Type 2 DM. Attaining secondary (aOR: 2.99, 95% CI: 1.48–6.03, P = 0.002) or tertiary, 95% CI: 1.02–6.80, P = 0.046), DM duration of 1–5 years (aOR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.00–4.48, P = 0.049), 5–10 years (aOR: 4.15, 95% CI: 1.84–9.35, P = 0.001), ≥ 10 years (aOR: 3.60, 95% CI: 1.68–7.75, P = 0.001), and good knowledge of diabetes-related eye complications (aOR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.00–2.45, P = 0.048) were significantly associated with eye care utilization. Less than half of diabetic patients at GRRH utilized eye care services in the past five years, with higher education, longer diabetes duration, and knowledge of ocular complications significantly associated with utilization. Targeted health education and integrated eye care services within diabetic clinics are recommended to improve utilization and reduce visual impairment. Limitations include potential recall bias and single-center design.
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.