Evidence Hub

Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-Up Study: (NYC-SIGHT)Tele-Retinal Image Findings and Importance of Photography

Horowitz JD, Adeghate JO, Karani R, Henriquez DR, Gorroochurn P, Sharma T, Park L, Wang Q et al.

Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association, 2024

157 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

Purpose: To describe tele-retinal abnormality image findings from the Manhattan Vision Screening and Follow-up Study (NYC-SIGHT), which aims to investigate whether community-based eye health outreach strategies using telemedicine can improve visual outcomes among at-risk populations in Upper Manhattan. Methods: A 5-year prospective, cluster-randomized clinical trial was conducted. Eligible individuals aged 40 years and older were recruited from affordable housing developments and senior centers in New York City. Participants underwent on-site eye health screening (best-corrected visual acuity, intraocular pressure [IOP] measurements, and fundus photography). Fundus images were graded via telemedicine by a retina specialist. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was used to assess the factors associated with abnormal retinal findings requiring referral to ophthalmology. Results: Participants with a retinal abnormality on fundus photography (n = 157) were predominantly older adults, with a mean age of 68.4 ± 11.1 years, female (63.7%), African American (50.3%), and Hispanic (43.3%). A total of 32 participants in our study passed the vision and IOP screening but had an abnormal retinal image and ocular pathology that would have been missed without fundus photography. Individuals who self-identified as having preexisting glaucoma (odds ratio [OR] = 3.749, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.741-8.074, p = 0.0001) and had severe vision impairment (OR = 4.1034, 95% CI =…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 157 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free