Constarium
← Search

Data · dataset · 2026

Evaluating screening strategies for diabetic retinopathy

Listed in ZivaHub and Deakin Research Online and DMU Figshare — shown once because both records carry DOI 10.17034/32633949.v1

Programmes for diabetic retinopathy screening have increased the number of patients screened for sight threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR) and permitted monitoring of people at risk of progression to referable diabetic retinopathy (RDR).

Description

A disparity between demand for screening and capacity to provide screening has arisen from the rapid increase in the prevalence of diabetes. Over 350,000 people have diabetes on the island of Ireland; most (~90%) have Type 2 diabetes (T2D).

The current mode of universal annual DR screening is unsustainable. A possible solution would be to increase screening intervals for those at “low risk”. The means of reliable identification of those at low risk will require identification of the factors associated with disease progression to RDR in Ireland.

Read the rest (3 more)

In chapter 3 of this thesis, we identify the factors associated with progression to RDR in the form of weighted covariates. Chapter 4 herein describes a prospective external validation of pre-existent prediction models for stratifying risk of progression to RDR in people with T2D in Ireland. Inputting into these pre-existent prediction models developed in Iceland and Gloucester (England) involved taking a linear combination of the published coefficients from the models and the corresponding variables in our dataset at the last systemic visit before the index retinal screening.

The accuracy of the models in predicting progression to RDR was compared with the outcomes observed in a prospective Irish cohort (n=939). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to assess models’ performance. Models developed in Iceland and Gloucester had an acceptable performance with an AUC of ~ 0.70 or above.

This signifies that there would be a >70% probability that a randomly selected subject from the screening cohort who did in fact develop RDR would have been allocated to the higher risk score category by each of the models. This suggests relative safety in individualising intervals between screening episodes.

Links

Where it is published

Catalogue records · 1

Topics

Inferred from text
Disease 75%
Provenance · 3 source records, 8 field assertions
SourceKeyLast seenRaw
ZivaHuboai:figshare.com:article/326339499 d agoJSON v1
Deakin Research Onlineoai:figshare.com:article/326339499 d agoJSON v1
DMU Figshareoai:figshare.com:article/326339499 d agoJSON v1
FieldAssertionExtractorEvidence
concepts[disease].local:disease:diseaseenrichment · zivahub uct ac zakeyword-concept-rules@1.0.0title+description (75%)
concepts[field].local:field:earth-environmentalmapping · zivahub uct ac zaconnector:zivahub_uct_ac_za@1.0.0
concepts[field].local:field:earth-environmentalmapping · dro deakin edu auconnector:dro_deakin_edu_au@1.0.0
concepts[field].local:field:earth-environmentalmapping · figshare dmu ac ukconnector:figshare_dmu_ac_uk@1.0.0
descriptionsource · zivahub uct ac zaconnector:zivahub_uct_ac_za@1.0.0/metadata/dc/description
license_textsource · zivahub uct ac zaconnector:zivahub_uct_ac_za@1.0.0
publication_datesource · zivahub uct ac zaconnector:zivahub_uct_ac_za@1.0.0
titlesource · zivahub uct ac zaconnector:zivahub_uct_ac_za@1.0.0/metadata/dc/title