Diabetic retinopathy evidence gap map

A health worker doing eye checks

What this map shows

At Sightsavers, our EGMs summarise, appraise, and present evidence from systematic or literature reviews.

The diabetic retinopathy EGM summarises evidence from 40 reviews. Most reviews (16) address risk factors and prevention of diabetic retinopathy, followed by nine that look at treatment and six which address screening. Of the remainder, four look at epidemiology of the disease, two include cost analysis, one looks at quality of clinical care, one looks at access to diabetic retinopathy-related health services and one looks at quality of life.

This gap map shows that there are clear gaps in evidence at the health-systems sector level. No reviews were identified for diabetic retinopathy-related quality of non-clinical care.

27 reviews provide strong evidence in response to the research question; nine reviews show weak or no evidence; and in four reviews the results are inconclusive (mixed results). Eight reviews are of high methodological quality; 16 reviews are of medium quality; and 10 reviews are graded low quality.

A young girl gets her eyes checked by a health worker

Want to know more about evidence gap maps (EGMs)?


How to use EGMs

How to use EGMs

Are we missing a systematic review?

This evidence gap map was last updated March 2020.
Help us keep this gap map up to date by sending us an email: [email protected]

Reference

Sightsavers (2020). Diabetic retinopathy Evidence Gap Map [online] Available at: https://research.sightsavers.org/evidence-gap-maps/diabetic-retinopathy-gap-map/ [Add date accessed]

Our research is guided by our five year strategy

How we work