ArticlePloS one2017
Incidence and progression of diabetic retinopathy in Sub-Saharan Africa: A five year cohort study.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Scoring and validation of a simple model for predicting diabetic retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes based on a meta-analysis approach of 21 cohorts.Annals of medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Incidence and predictors of diabetic retinopathy among patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension: a 10-year retrospective follow-up study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Diabetic Retinopathy Prevalence and Incidence in Zimbabwe: The Feasibility of Digital Fundoscopy Screening.Journal of diabetes research · 2026Observational
- Artificial intelligence for early detection of diabetes mellitus complications via retinal imaging.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2025Review
- Impact and Trends in Global Ophthalmology.Current ophthalmology reports · 2020Review
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo describe the incidence and progression of retinopathy in people with diabetes in Southern Malawi over 5 years. To document visual loss in a setting where laser treatment is not available.
methodsSubjects from a cohort sampled from a hospital-based, primary-care diabetes clinic in 2007 were traced in 2012. Laser treatment was not available. Modified Wisconsin grading of retinopathy was performed using slit lamp biomicroscopy by a single ophthalmologist in 2007 and using four-field mydriatic fundus photographs at an accredited reading centre in 2012. Visual acuity was measured by Snellen chart in 2007 and by 'Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study' chart in 2012. HbA1c, blood pressure, HIV status, urine albumin-creatinine ratio, haemoglobin and lipids were measured.
resultsOf 281 subjects recruited in 2007, 135 (48%) were traced and assessed, 15 were confirmed dead. At follow-up (median 5.3 years) ≥2 step retinopathy progression was observed in 48 subjects (36.4%; 95% CI 28.2-44.6). Incidence of sight threatening diabetic retinopathy for those with level 10 (no retinopathy) and level 20 (background) retinopathy at baseline, was 19.4% (11.3-27.4) and 81.3% (62.1-100), respectively. In multivariate analysis 2 step progression was associated with HbA1c (OR 1.2495%CI 1.04-1.48), and haemoglobin level (0.77, 0.62-0.98). 25 subjects (18.8%) lost ≥5 letters, 7 (5.3%) lost ≥15 letters.
conclusionsProgression to sight threatening diabetic retinopathy from no retinopathy and background retinopathy was approximately 5 and 3 times that reported in recent European studies, respectively. Incidence of visual loss was high in a location where treatment was not available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.