Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33976399›Full record

ReviewEye (London, England)2021

Recently updated global diabetic retinopathy screening guidelines: commonalities, differences, and future possibilities.

Taraprasad Das, Brijesh Takkar, Sobha Sivaprasad, Thamarangsi Thanksphon, Hugh Taylor, Peter Wiedemann, Janos Nemeth, Patanjali D Nayar, Padmaja Kumari Rani, Rajiv Khandekar

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Eye (London, England), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The march to harmonized imaging standards for retinal imaging.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

10 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

Taraprasad DasSrimati Kanuri Santhamma Centre for Vitreoretinal Diseases, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India. tpd@lvpei.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1295-4528
Brijesh TakkarSrimati Kanuri Santhamma Centre for Vitreoretinal Diseases, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5779-7645
Sobha SivaprasadNIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Thamarangsi ThanksphonFormer Director, Healthier Populations and Non-Communicable Disease, WHO Regional Office for South- East Asia Region, New Delhi, India.
Hugh TaylorMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Peter WiedemannDepartment of Ophthalmology, University Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Janos NemethDepartment of Ophthalmology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8575-4888
Patanjali D NayarRegional Advisor, Disability & Injury Prevention and Rehabilitation, Healthier Populations and Non-Communicable Disease, WHO Regional Office for South- East Asia Region, New Delhi, India.
Padmaja Kumari RaniSrimati Kanuri Santhamma Centre for Vitreoretinal Diseases, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7069-8238
Rajiv KhandekarDepartment of Research, Ophthalmic epidemiology & Low Vision, King Khalid Eye Hospital, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
L V Prasad Eye Institute · INWorld Health Organization Regional Office for South-East Asia · INInternational Agency for the Prevention of Blindness · GBMoorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBSemmelweis University · HUThe University of Melbourne · AUUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/P027881/1World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a global health burden. Screening for sight-threatening DR (STDR) is the first cost-effective step to decrease this burden. We analyzed the similarities and variations between the recent country-specific and the International Council of Ophthalmology (ICO) DR guideline to identify gaps and suggest possible solutions for future universal screening. We selected six representative national DR guidelines, one from each World Health Organization region, including Canada (North America), England (Europe), India (South- East Asia), Kenya (Africa), New Zealand (Western Pacific), and American Academy of Ophthalmology Preferred Practice Pattern (used in Latin America and East Mediterranean). We weighed the newer camera and artificial intelligence (AI) technology against the traditional screening methodologies. All guidelines agree that screening for DR and STDR in people with diabetes is currently led by an ophthalmologist; few engage non-ophthalmologists. Significant variations exist in the screening location and referral timelines. Screening with digital fundus photography has largely replaced traditional slit-lamp examination and ophthalmoscopy. The use of mydriatic digital 2-or 4-field fundus photography is the current norm; there is increasing interest in using non-mydriatic fundus cameras. The use of automated DR grading and tele-screening is currently sparse. Country-specific guidelines are necessary to align with national priorities and human resources. International guidelines such as the ICO DR guidelines remain useful in countries where no guidelines exist. Validation studies on AI and tele-screening call for urgent policy decisions to integrate DR screening into universal health coverage to reduce this global public health burden.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusDiabetic RetinopathyArtificial IntelligenceFundus OculiHumansMass ScreeningPhotography

Identifiers

PMID33976399
PMCPMC8452707
OpenAlexW3160145803

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.