Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33316144›Full record

ReviewJournal of diabetes investigation2021

Update in the epidemiology, risk factors, screening, and treatment of diabetic retinopathy.

Kuan-Yu Lin, Wen-Hui Hsih, Yen-Bo Lin, Chen-Yu Wen, Tien-Jyun Chang

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of diabetes investigation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 249 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
249citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

249 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Short-term natural history of non-perfusion areas in treatment-naive diabetic retinopathy patients using swept-source OCT angiography.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

189 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kuan-Yu LinDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Wen-Hui HsihDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Yen-Bo LinDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chen-Yu WenDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Tien-Jyun ChangDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9437-5847

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite progress in the treatment of diabetic macular edema and diabetic retinopathy, the rate of lower fundus examination due to limitations of medical resources delays the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic retinopathy. Therefore, implementation of automated diabetic retinopathy screening program and the identification of more specific and sensitive biomarkers are important for facilitating the earlier detection of diabetic macular edema and diabetic retinopathy to decrease the prevalence of poor vision and blindness.

Indexed as

BiomarkersDiabetes MellitusDiabetic RetinopathyHumansMass ScreeningPrevalenceRisk FactorsBiomarkersDiabetes retinopathyEpidemiologyRisk factorsScreeningTreatment

Identifiers

PMID33316144
PMCPMC8354492

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.