Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 891

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 99 of the 99 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Management of Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review

Mohamed, Quresh, Gillies, Mark C., Wong, Tien Y.·2007·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the leading cause of blindness in the working-aged population in the United States. There are many new interventions for DR, but evidence to support their use is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To review the best evidence for primary and secondary intervention in the management of DR, including diabetic macular edema. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Systematic review of all English-language articles, retrieved using a keyword search of MEDLINE (1966 through May 2007), EMBASE, Cochrane Collaboration, the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology database, and the National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Database, and followed by manual searches of reference lists of selected major review articles. All English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with more than 12 months of follow-up and meta-analyses were included. Delphi consensus criteria were used to identify well-conducted studies. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Forty-four studies (including 3 meta-analyses) met the inclusion criteria. Tight glycemic and blood pressure control reduces the incidence and progression of DR. Pan-retinal laser photocoagulation reduces the risk of moderate and severe visual loss by 50% in patients with severe nonproliferative and proliferative retinopathy. Focal laser photocoagulation reduces the risk of moderate visual loss by 50% to 70% in eyes with macular edema. Early vitrectomy improves visual recovery in patients with proliferative retinopathy and severe vitreous hemorrhage. Intravitreal injections of steroids may be considered in eyes with persistent loss of vision when conventional treatment has failed. There is insufficient evidence for the efficacy or safety of lipid-lowering therapy, medical interventions, or antivascular endothelial growth factors on the incidence or progression of DR. CONCLUSIONS: Tight glycemic and blood pressure control remains the cornerstone in the primary prevention of DR. Pan-retinal and focal retinal laser photocoagulation reduces the risk of visual loss in patients with severe DR and macular edema, respectively. There is currently insufficient evidence to recommend routine use of other treatments.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.298.8.902

Cites

99 of 99 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 99 references

Cited by

See all 891

Metadata

Authors
Mohamed, Q., Gillies, M. C., & Wong, T. Y.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2007-08-22
Volume
298
Issue
8
Pages
902
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2032687008
Cited by
891
References
99
FWCI
32.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Management of Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.298.8.902
The paper
Mohamed, Q., Gillies, M. C., & Wong, T. Y. (2007). Management of Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.8.902

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.