Evidence mapPaperPMID 40311700Full record

Trial reportOphthalmology2025

Michigan Screening and Intervention for Glaucoma and Eye Health through Telemedicine Program: Impact on Vision, Follow-up, and Costs.

Paula Anne Newman-Casey, Leslie M Niziol, Angela R Elam, Amanda K Bicket, Rithambara Ramachandran, Leroy Johnson, Martha Kershaw, Suzanne Winters, Maria A Woodward

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Paula Anne Newman-CaseyDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Electronic address: panewman@med.umich.edu.
Leslie M NiziolDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Angela R ElamDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Amanda K BicketDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Rithambara RamachandranDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Leroy JohnsonHamilton Community Health Network, Flint, Michigan.
Martha KershawHope Clinic, Ypsilanti, Michigan.
Suzanne WintersDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Maria A WoodwardDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Funding

Michigan Institute for Clinical and Health Research (MICHR)UM1TR004404 · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · 2025 to 2025
$9.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UM1 TR004404NCCDPHP CDC HHS U01 DP006442NIMHD NIH HHS K23 MD016430
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the impact of the Michigan Screening and Intervention for Glaucoma and Eye Health through Telemedicine (MI-SIGHT) program on visual acuity (VA), vision-related quality of life (VRQOL), satisfaction, follow-up visit attendance, and costs among medically underserved participants receiving primary care at community health centers.

designProspective cohort study with an embedded randomized controlled trial.

participantsAdults ≥ age 18.

methodsThe MI-SIGHT participants underwent an eye disease screening examination with a trained ophthalmic technician, received assistance ordering low-cost glasses, and completed surveys. Participants could return for repeat screening after 1 year. The prevalence of disease identified was compared with national rates using z tests. Visual acuity and VRQOL were compared between initial and repeat visits with paired t tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Satisfaction was summarized with descriptive statistics. Attendance at recommended follow-up was assessed overall and compared by arm (chi squared tests) for those screening positive for glaucoma who were randomized to care navigation plus personalized education and health coaching (treatment) or care navigation plus written education (control). MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Eye disease prevalence, change in VA and VRQOL, program satisfaction, follow-up attendance, and costs.

resultsThree thousand seven hundred fourteen participants were analyzed; 11.5% were visually impaired, 9.3% had uncorrected or undercorrected refractive error causing visual impairment, 22.4% had glaucoma or suspected glaucoma, 4.7% had diabetic retinopathy (all rates higher than national averages at P < 0.0001), 99% were satisfied or very satisfied, and 68% attended recommended follow-up. Nine hundred forty-three participants completed repeat screening where worse-eye presenting VA improved (from 0.25 ± 0.59 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR] to 0.21 ± 0.52 logMAR; P = 0.0012), as did VRQOL (9-item National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire composite score of 81.1 ± 14.1 to 86.4 ± 12.0; P < 0.0001). Of the 490 participants who screened positive for glaucoma or suspected glaucoma who were randomized (n = 247 treatment group, n = 243 control group), follow-up attendance did not differ (61% vs. 59%; P = 0.74). The program cost $110.99 per participant served, and $206.72 per case of eye disease detected.

conclusionsExpanding glaucoma and eye disease screening and treatment of refractive error to community health centers with care navigation support could improve vision and eye health outcomes. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Indexed as

GlaucomaHealth Care CostsTelemedicineVision ScreeningVisual AcuityAdultAgedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMichiganMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionPrevalenceProspective StudiesAttendance at follow-upCostsEye disease screeningGlaucoma screeningVision-related quality of life

Identifiers

PMID40311700
PMCPMC12353381

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.