Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorHamid, Sana
dc.contributor.authorDesai, Parul
dc.contributor.authorHysi, Pirro
dc.contributor.authorBurr, Jennifer M.
dc.contributor.authorKhawaja, Anthony P.
dc.date.accessioned2021-08-30T11:30:11Z
dc.date.available2021-08-30T11:30:11Z
dc.date.issued2021-08-03
dc.identifier.citationHamid , S , Desai , P , Hysi , P , Burr , J M & Khawaja , A P 2021 , ' Population screening for glaucoma in UK : current recommendations and future directions ' , Eye , vol. First Online . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-021-01687-8en
dc.identifier.issn0950-222X
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 275613868
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: f705a44f-23c6-4cc3-a318-bb5e0bc954b6
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 85111882190
dc.identifier.otherWOS: 000680806900006
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10023/23865
dc.descriptionFunding Information: APK is funded by a UKRI Future Leaders Fellowship and an Alcon Research Institute Young Investigator Award.en
dc.description.abstractEffective population screening for glaucoma would enable earlier diagnosis and prevention of irreversible vision loss. The UK National Screening Committee (NSC) recently published a review that examined the viability, effectiveness and appropriateness of a population-based screening programme for primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). In our article, we summarise the results of the review and discuss some future directions that may enable effective population screening for glaucoma in the future. Two key questions were addressed by the UK NSC review; is there a valid, accurate screening test for POAG, and does evidence exist that screening reduces morbidity from POAG compared with standard care. Six new studies were identified since the previous 2015 review. The review concluded that screening for glaucoma in adults is not recommended because there is no clear evidence for a sufficiently accurate screening test or for better outcomes with screening compared to current care. The next UK NSC review is due to be conducted in 2023. One challenge for POAG screening is that the relatively low disease prevalence results in too many false-positive referrals, even with an accurate test. In the future, targeted screening of a population subset with a higher prevalence of glaucoma may be effective. Recent developments in POAG polygenic risk prediction and deep learning image analysis offer potential avenues to identifying glaucoma-enriched sub-populations. Until such time, opportunistic case finding through General Ophthalmic Services remains the primary route for identification of glaucoma in the UK and greater public awareness of the service would be of benefit.
dc.format.extent6
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofEyeen
dc.rightsCopyright © The Author(s) 2021. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.en
dc.subjectOpticnerve diseasesen
dc.subjectPredictive markersen
dc.subjectRE Ophthalmologyen
dc.subjectOphthalmologyen
dc.subjectSensory Systemsen
dc.subject.lccREen
dc.titlePopulation screening for glaucoma in UK : current recommendations and future directionsen
dc.typeJournal itemen
dc.description.versionPublisher PDFen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.School of Medicineen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.Population and Behavioural Science Divisionen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-021-01687-8
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record