ArticleBMC public health2025
Diabetic retinopathy screening model in low and middle-income countries: a scoping review.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early Detection of Glaucoma and Diabetic Retinopathy in Low-Resource Settings: Barriers and Solutions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Ultra-widefield color fundus photography in diabetic retinopathy: from panretinal assessment to multimodal integration.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Technology-driven diabetes care: innovation without equity?Frontiers in digital health · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiabetic retinopathy (DR), a leading cause of blindness in working-age adults, disproportionately affects low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). While preventable through early intervention, DR screening programs are often lacking in these resource-constrained settings.
objectiveThis scoping review examines DR screening models implemented in LMICs, identifying evidence, research gaps, and potential improvement strategies.
methodsA literature search across multiple databases identified studies on DR screening in LMICs, limited to peer-reviewed articles from the past 20 years focusing on DR screening model effectiveness or implementation. Key data (study design, screening techniques, outcomes) were extracted and synthesized narratively.
resultsThis review synthesized 30 studies on DR screening in LMICs, mainly from India, South Africa, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. These studies explored diverse screening methods, from traditional techniques (ophthalmoscopy, funduscopy, slit lamp exams) to telemedicine and AI. Non-mydriatic fundus photography, often with AI-assisted grading, was common, as were remote grading and store-and-forward systems. Given the resource constraints in these settings, non-mydriatic methods were often preferred. Many studies optimized resources by training non-physicians for image acquisition, followed by specialist grading. The reviewed studies highlighted the effectiveness of community-based screening programs in expanding coverage and improving patient adherence. Furthermore, they demonstrated the cost-effectiveness of smartphone-based imaging devices and AI-driven systems. However, challenges remained, including limited infrastructure, inconsistent training, and follow-up difficulties.
conclusionsLMIC DR screening utilizes traditional and innovative technologies, with community-based approaches, telemedicine, and AI enhancing reach and accuracy. Transitioning from case-finding to population-based screening requires stronger diabetes surveillance and integration within primary care.
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.