ArticleCancer medicine2026
Creation of a Retinoblastoma Registry in a Resource-Limited Country in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Article in Cancer 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
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRetinoblastoma (RB) is the most common ocular tumor in young children, originating from the developing retina, with the burden remaining higher in regions of low socio-demographic index. A registry of RB is essential for creating effective referral networks for evaluating treatment patterns and contributing to the global pool of knowledge.
aimTo develop an RB registry for Ghana and assess its feasibility and acceptability.
methodsAn online REDCap (Research Electronic Data Capture) database was created as a registry of children diagnosed with RB in Ghana. Data completeness across core variables was analyzed and presented as a percentage. Technical, operational feasibility, and acceptability of the registry were assessed. Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted with 2 users from each center to assess acceptability. At each treatment center, a registry lead was trained to enter data into the REDCap database.
resultsData were entered, aggregated, and stored in the REDCap database. Data captured included: socio-demographic and clinical information, clinical staging and systemic evaluations, histopathological risk assessment and staging, and final treatment outcomes. With reliable hardware performance, safe software features, and steady network connectivity backed by offline caching, the registry proved technically and operationally feasible. The average data entry time was 15 min, and the data quality was over 70%. Acceptability was emphasized in user interviews by themes of completeness and data quality, timeliness and workflow integration, and correctness and clinical relevance.
conclusionsThe registry demonstrated strong technical and operational feasibility, with efficient workflows and reliable infrastructure. High data quality and user-validated acceptability underscore its integration into routine clinical practice.
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.