ArticleResearch square2026
Understanding Primary Care Physicians' Comprehension of Eye Care Notes to Improve Diabetes Care Coordination.
Article in Research square, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Diabetic retinopathy screening and management involve collaboration between primary care providers (PCPs), endocrinologists, and eye care providers, yet eye care documentation poses challenges to inter-specialty communication. Objective: To assess PCP and endocrinologist comprehension of ophthalmology notes, identify barriers to interpretation, and identify strategies for improvement. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of 82 PCPs and endocrinologists across three academic tertiary health systems between November 2022 and December 2024. The survey collected demographic data, prior rotations in ophthalmology, and self-reported comprehension of components of eye care notes using 5-point Likert scales. 67 participants reviewed three sample eye care progress notes and identified whether a dilated fundus examination was performed and the presence of diabetic retinopathy for each note. Free-text responses were analyzed thematically. Results: Self-reported comprehension of eye care documentation was modest: 47% agreed and 6% strongly agreed that they generally understand eye care notes. Comprehension of sample notes similarly varied, with correct identification of dilation status ranging from 94-96% and diabetic retinopathy status from 37-82%. 29% of respondents who answered fewer than half of the questions correctly reported confidence in their general understanding of eye care notes. Major barriers to inter-specialty care coordination for patients with diabetes included inconsistent coding and formatting and use of ophthalmology-specific jargon and abbreviations. Conclusions: PCPs and endocrinologists demonstrated variable confidence in their comprehension of eye care documentation, with measurable gaps in interpreting key clinical elements of notes. More standardized and structured documentation may improve inter-specialty communication and coordination of care for patients with diabetes.
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.