Home › Research › Digital health tools
Monitoring visual status: why patients do or do not comply with practice guidelines
Sloan FA, Brown DS, Carlisle ES, Picone GA, Lee PP.. Health services research, 2004-10-01
Topic: Health services, long-term care and technology
Objective To determine factors affecting compliance with guidelines for annual eye examinations for persons diagnosed with diabetes mellitus (DM) or age-related macular degeneration (ARMD). Data sources/study setting Nationally representative, longitudinal sample of individuals 65+ drawn from the National Long-Term Care Survey (NLTCS) with linked Medicare claims records from 1991 to 1999. Study design Medicare beneficiaries were followed from 1991 to 1999, unless mortality intervened. All claims data were analyzed for presence of ICD-9 codes indicating diagnosis of DM or ARMD and the performance of eye exams. The dependent variable was a binary indicator for whether a person had an eye exam or not during a 15-month period. Independent variables for demographics, living conditions, supplemental insurance, income, and other factors affecting the marginal cost and benefit of an eye exam were assessed to determine reasons for noncompliance. Data collection/extraction methods Panel data were created from claims files, 1991-1999, merged with data from the NLTCS. Principal findings The probability of having an exam reflected perceived benefits, which vary by patient characteristics (e.g., education, no dementia), and factors associated with the ease of visit. African Americans were much less likely to be examined than were whites. Conclusions Having an exam reflects multiple factors. However, much of the variation in the probability of an exam remained unexplained as were reasons for the racial differences in use.
Key findings
- Principal findings The probability of having an exam reflected perceived benefits, which vary by patient characteristics (e.g., education, no dementia), and factors associated with the ease of visit.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 52/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Health services research) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2004 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 15333116) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 30 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100. |
| Total | 52 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Sloan, F. A., Brown, D. S., Carlisle, E. S., Picone, G. A., & Lee, P. P. (2004). Monitoring visual status: why patients do or do not comply with practice guidelines. Health services research. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00297.x
Vancouver
Sloan FA, Brown DS, Carlisle ES, Picone GA, Lee PP. Monitoring visual status: why patients do or do not comply with practice guidelines. Health services research. 2004. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00297.x. PMID: 15333116.
BibTeX
@article{sloan2004-15333116,
author = {Sloan, F. A. and Brown, D. S. and Carlisle, E. S. and Picone, G. A. and Lee, P. P.},
title = {{Monitoring visual status: why patients do or do not comply with practice guidelines}},
journal = {Health services research},
year = {2004},
doi = {10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00297.x},
pmid = {15333116},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00297.x}
}
Related studies in Digital health tools
Also tagged “costs”
265 studies in the library carry the topic tag “costs”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 265 tagged studies.