ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Implementation of diabetic retinopathy screening in the Oslo region, Norway: a 3-year pilot study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Determine the prevalence and progression of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and its risk factors over a three year period in a pilot DR screening program in the Oslo region. Methods: The pilot screening program enrolled 90 adult patients with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) from December 2019 to January 2021. Patients were referred by general practitioners and underwent annual DR screening, including fundus photography and optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging. Baseline and follow-up data included socio-demographic parameters, diabetes history and medication, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), visual acuity, blood pressure, and intraocular pressure. DR severity was graded using the International Clinical Disease Severity Scale for DR, and diabetic macular edema (DME) was identified based on OCT findings. Cox regression analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with DR progression. Results: At baseline, prevalence of DR was 27.8%, with 6.7% of the patients exhibiting vision-threatening DR (VTDR). Over the 3-year follow-up, 24.7% of the patients either developed or showed a progression of DR, with 4% developing VTDR. Duration of diabetes and urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio were significantly associated with DR progression (hazard ratio 1.07 (95% confidence interval 1.02-1.12) and 1.03 (95% confidence interval 1.01-1.06), respectively). 13.3% of patients were lost to follow-up, primarily due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion: Most patients had stable DR over the 3 years period. Diabetes duration and albuminuria predicted progression, supporting extended screening intervals for low-risk patients with risk-based stratification.
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.