Melbourne School of Population and Global Health - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3
-
ItemGrand Challenges in global eye health: a global prioritisation process using Delphi method(ELSEVIER SCI LTD, 2022-01)BACKGROUND: We undertook a Grand Challenges in Global Eye Health prioritisation exercise to identify the key issues that must be addressed to improve eye health in the context of an ageing population, to eliminate persistent inequities in health-care access, and to mitigate widespread resource limitations. METHODS: Drawing on methods used in previous Grand Challenges studies, we used a multi-step recruitment strategy to assemble a diverse panel of individuals from a range of disciplines relevant to global eye health from all regions globally to participate in a three-round, online, Delphi-like, prioritisation process to nominate and rank challenges in global eye health. Through this process, we developed both global and regional priority lists. FINDINGS: Between Sept 1 and Dec 12, 2019, 470 individuals complete round 1 of the process, of whom 336 completed all three rounds (round 2 between Feb 26 and March 18, 2020, and round 3 between April 2 and April 25, 2020) 156 (46%) of 336 were women, 180 (54%) were men. The proportion of participants who worked in each region ranged from 104 (31%) in sub-Saharan Africa to 21 (6%) in central Europe, eastern Europe, and in central Asia. Of 85 unique challenges identified after round 1, 16 challenges were prioritised at the global level; six focused on detection and treatment of conditions (cataract, refractive error, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, services for children and screening for early detection), two focused on addressing shortages in human resource capacity, five on other health service and policy factors (including strengthening policies, integration, health information systems, and budget allocation), and three on improving access to care and promoting equity. INTERPRETATION: This list of Grand Challenges serves as a starting point for immediate action by funders to guide investment in research and innovation in eye health. It challenges researchers, clinicians, and policy makers to build collaborations to address specific challenges. FUNDING: The Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Trust, Moorfields Eye Charity, National Institute for Health Research Moorfields Biomedical Research Centre, Wellcome Trust, Sightsavers, The Fred Hollows Foundation, The Seva Foundation, British Council for the Prevention of Blindness, and Christian Blind Mission. TRANSLATIONS: For the French, Spanish, Chinese, Portuguese, Arabic and Persian translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
-
ItemA comparison of methods to estimate the survivor average causal effect in the presence of missing data: a simulation study (vol 19, 223, 2019)(BMC, 2020-02-27)In the original publication of this article [1], the incorrect causal diagram was submitted as Fig. 1.
-
ItemRelationship Between Rod-Mediated Sensitivity, Low-Luminance Visual Acuity, and Night Vision Questionnaire in Age-Related Macular Degeneration(ASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC, 2020-05)PURPOSE: To quantify the association between dark adaptation parameters and other clinical measures of visual function among people with and without early and intermediate age-related macular degeneration (AMD). METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, participants underwent multimodal imaging and visual function testing, including best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), low-luminance visual acuity (LLVA), low-luminance deficit (LLD = BCVA - LLVA) and the 10-item Night Vision Questionnaire (NVQ-10). Dynamic and static dark-adapted chromatic perimetry (DACP) was performed. Sensitivity difference was defined as the difference in sensitivity between the 505-nm and 625-nm stimuli. Rod intercept time (RIT) was estimated as the time required to reach a threshold of -3 log candelas/meter2 with the 505-nm stimulus following bleaching. The magnitude of association between the DACP parameters and other clinical tests was estimated via mixed-effects regression. RESULTS: A total of 51 participants (aged 51-88 years, 65% female, 39% with AMD) were included. RIT was found to be negatively associated with BCVA (P < 0.001), LLVA (P = 0.005), and NVQ-10 score (P = 0.028) but not LLD (P = 0.763). There was no evidence of an association between sensitivity difference and any of the clinical measures (P ≥ 0.081). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced rod function, as determined by RIT, was associated with lower NVQ-10 scores (designed to interrogate rod-mediated function) and with worse BCVA and LLVA (measures of cone function). TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: Decreasing rod function maybe indicative of more generalized photoreceptor dysfunction involving cones. Further development of questionnaires to target function in scotopic conditions may provide an easier to administer test without the need to perform perimetric tests of rod function.