ArticlePloS one2024
Comprehensive insights into a decade-long journey: The evolution, impact, and human factors of an asynchronous telemedicine program for diabetic retinopathy screening in Pennsylvania, United States.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
- Implementing Diabetic Eye Care in Rural Primary Care Through Teleophthalmology and Pop-Up Clinics: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR diabetes · 2026Article
- Broadband Access and Ophthalmologist Density in the United States: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2026Article
- Mobile Eye Units in the United States and Canada: A Narrative Review of Structures, Services and Challenges.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Review
- Detection Rate of Diabetic Retinopathy Before and After Implementation of Autonomous AI-based Fundus Photograph Analysis in a Resource-Limited Area in Belize.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Follow-up in a point-of-care diabetic retinopathy program in Pittsburgh: a non-concurrent retrospective cohort study.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetic Retinopathy stands as a leading cause of irreversible blindness, necessitating frequent examinations, especially in the early stages where effective treatments are available. However, current examination rates vary widely, ranging from 25-60%. This study scrutinizes the Point-of-Care Diabetic Retinopathy Examination Program at the University of Pittsburgh/UPMC, delving into its composition, evolution, challenges, solutions, and improvement opportunities. Employing a narrative approach, insights are gathered from key stakeholders, including ophthalmologists and staff from primary care clinics. A quantitative analysis from 2008 to 2020 provides a comprehensive overview of program outcomes, covering 94 primary care offices with 51 retinal cameras. Program components feature automated non-mydriatic 45° retinal cameras, a dedicated coordinator, rigorous training, and standardized workflows. Over this period, the program conducted 21,960 exams in 16,458 unique individuals, revealing a diverse population with an average age of 58.5 and a balanced gender distribution. Average body mass index (33.96±8.02 kg/m2) and hemoglobin A1c (7.58%±1.88%) surpassed normal ranges, indicating prevalent risk factors for diabetes-related complications. Notably, 24.2% of patients underwent more than one exam, emphasizing program engagement. Findings indicated that 86.3% of exams were gradable, with 59.0% within normal limits, 12.1% showing some evidence of diabetic retinopathy, and 6.4% exhibiting vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy. Follow-up appointments with ophthalmologists were recommended in 31.5% of exams due to indeterminate results, positive diabetic retinopathy (≥moderate or macular exudate), or other findings like age-related macular degeneration or suspected glaucoma. The program demonstrated high reproducibility across diverse healthcare settings, featuring a sustainable model with minimal camera downtime, standardized workflows, and financial support from grants, health systems, and clinical revenues. Despite COVID-19 pandemic challenges, this research emphasizes the program's reproducibility, user-friendly evolution, and promising outcomes. Beyond technical contributions, it highlights human factors influencing program success. Future research could explore adherence to follow-up ophthalmological recommendations and its associated factors.
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.