ReviewOphthalmology and therapy2026
The Burden of Delayed Diabetic Retinopathy Management and Use of Artificial Intelligence-Driven Screening Tools: A Systematic Literature Review.
Review in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePatients with diabetic retinopathy (DR) are at risk of visual deterioration owing to systemic and financial barriers in accessing appropriate care. DR screening tools that implement artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms are gaining recognition due to their accuracy and high-throughput potential. This systematic literature review aimed to understand the economic, humanistic, and clinical burden associated with delayed DR management and the impact of AI-based screening tools for diagnosis and treatment.
methodsMEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (1 January 2014 to 28 October 2024). Screening, extraction, and quality assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. Supplementary searching was conducted to evaluate visual outcomes.
resultsIn total, 33 records were included. Economic evidence demonstrated that infrequent screening was initially cost-saving but decreased patient quality-adjusted life years, delayed sight-threatening DR diagnosis, and resulted in high treatment-related costs in the long term. Several studies found delayed DR treatment to adversely impact visual acuity, central subfield thickness, and time spent with vision loss. The majority of economic studies evaluating AI-based screening found its use to result in lower overall costs than conventional screening, while two noted higher costs attributable to greater screening uptake and increased specialist referrals. Most studies that modeled clinical impact found AI-based screening to reduce blindness or vision loss versus conventional screening.
conclusionsThis research underscored the considerable harms associated with delayed DR diagnosis and treatment. AI-based screening tools have the potential to become powerful instruments in supporting improved clinical outcomes for patients and economic benefits for healthcare systems.
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.