ArticleEye (London, England)2025
Nationwide trends and incidence of blindness in patients with diabetic retinopathy identified using an age-period-cohort analysis.
Article in Eye (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A diabetes-induced change of MDM2 SNP309T→G contributes to aberrant retinal angiogenesis.Diabetologia · 2026Article
- Remote Ischemic Conditioning for Non-Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy (RIC-NPDR): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo estimate the epidemiologic trends of blindness in patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR) and investigate the age-, period-, and cohort-specific effects on blindness.
methodsA total of 2.5 million patients with DR aged 20 years or older were included from the Korean National Health Claims database from 2005 to 2019. Non-proliferative DR/ proliferative DR (NPDR/PDR) cohorts were constructed separately. Participants were identified as having a blindness in at least one eye. The incidence of blindness were calculated using a log-linear Poisson age-period-cohort (APC) analysis model, each effect on blindness were estimated for each study group.
resultsThe incidence of blindness was 1326.62 per 100,000 in the NPDR group and 3397.57 in the PDR group. The blindness rate sharply decreased after 2011, with annual decreases of 5.6% and 4.4% in the NPDR and the PDR groups, respectively. People born between 1920 and 1930 had the highest overall risk of blindness, with the risk decreasing rapidly after that. For those born after 1980, the risk started to increase in both sexes. Among the APC models, the combination model of age, period, and cohort effects showed the highest explanatory power (0.96).
conclusionsIn this nationwide long-term study, blindness in DR was not due to a single epidemiologic cause but rather a combination of biological age, social determinants, and healthcare policies. The increased risk of blindness in individuals in their 20 s and 30 s may even increase in the future and should not be ignored. Therefore, vigilance of younger patients is recommended.
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.