Cited by 73Retinal Diseases and TreatmentsRetinal Imaging and AnalysisDiabetes Management and Research

The Prevalence of Diabetic Retinopathy in Australian Adults with Self-Reported Diabetes

Keel, Stuart, Xie, Jing, Foreman, Joshua, van Wijngaarden, Peter, Taylor, Hugh R., Dirani, Mohamed·2017·Ophthalmology

Abstract

Purpose To determine the prevalence of and factors associated with diabetic retinopathy (DR) among non-Indigenous and Indigenous Australian adults with self-reported diabetes. Design Population-based cross-sectional study. Participants Non-Indigenous Australians (50-98 years of age) and Indigenous Australians (40-92 years of age) with known diabetes. Methods Diabetes was determined based on self-report of previous diagnosis of the disease. Nonmydriatic fundus photographs were obtained of each eye and graded according to the modified Airlie House classification system. Main outcome measures Any DR, vision-threatening DR (VTDR), treatment coverage rates (proportion of participants with proliferative DR [PDR], clinically significant macular edema [CSME], or both who had evidence of retinal scatter and focal laser treatment). Results Four hundred thirty-one non-Indigenous Australians (13.9%) and 645 Indigenous Australians (37.1%) self-reported diabetes, of whom 93% (1004/1076) had retinal images that were gradable for DR. The sampling weight-adjusted prevalence of any DR and VTDR among non-Indigenous adults with self-reported diabetes was 28.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.6-35.3) and 4.5% (95% CI, 2.6-7.9), respectively. Among adults 40 years of age and older, the sampling weight-adjusted prevalence of any DR and VTDR was 39.4% (95% CI, 33.1-46.1) and 9.5% (95% CI, 6.8-13.1), respectively. Longer diabetes duration was associated significantly with VTDR in the Indigenous Aus…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.02.004

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keel, S., Xie, J., Foreman, J., van Wijngaarden, P., Taylor, H. R., & Dirani, M.
Affiliations
  • The Royal Victorian Eye & Ear Hospital (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Keel, Stuart
Venue
Ophthalmology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-07
Volume
124
Issue
7
Pages
977-984
ISSN
0161-6420 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2598450878
Cited by
73
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 1
FWCI
6.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Retinal Diseases and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal Imaging and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
diabetic retinopathy, prevalence, vision-threatening diabetic retinopathy, Indigenous Australians, non-Indigenous Australians, diabetes duration, proliferative diabetic retinopathy, clinically significant macular edema, retinal laser treatment, treatment coverage, vision loss, risk factors, fundus photography grading, Australia, Indigenous health disparities, older adults, self-reported diabetes
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Diabetes Mellitus, Diabetic Retinopathy, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Prevalence, Population Groups, Self Report

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