Surveying sexualities: Internet research with non-heterosexuals

In this article we describe and evaluate the process of conducting online survey research about the legal recognition of same-sex relationships (key findings from which we have reported elsewhere, see Harding and Peel, 2006). Our aim in so doing is to contribute to the growing generic literature on internet-based research methods (Nosek et al., 2002; Rhodes et al., 2003; Stern, 2003; Strickland et al., 2003; Thomas et al., 2000) to the research methods literature within lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and queer (LGBTQ) psychologies (Fish, 2000; Morris and Rothblum, 1999; Meezan and Martin, 2003; Mustanski, 2001) and also to extend the germinal literature focusing on internet research with non-heterosexual groups (Elford et al., 2004; Ellis et al., 2003; Ross et al., 2000). We begin by discussing the process of developing the online survey tool, before outlining the experience of the survey ‘going live’ and providing details of who completed the survey. We conclude by exploring some of the positives and pitfalls of this type of research methodology.

How accurate are photographic surrogate markers used to detect macular oedema in the english national Screening Programme?

Introduction: Macular oedema is not directly visible on digital photographs used in screening. Photographic surrogate markers are used to detect patients who may have macular oedema. Evidence suggests that only around 10% of patients with these surrogate markers referred to an ophthalmologist have macular oedema when examined by slit-lamp biomicroscopy. Purpose: The purpose of this audit was to determine how many patients with surrogate markers were truly identified by optical coherence tomography (OCT) as having macular oedema. Method: Data were collected from patients attending digital diabetic retinopathy screening. Patients who presented with surrogate markers for macular oedema also had an OCT scan. The fast macula scan on the Stratus OCT was used and an ophthalmologist reviewed the scans to determine whether macular oedema was present. Results: Out of 66 patients with maculopathy defined as haemorrhages or microaneurysms within one optic disc diameter (DD) of the fovea and visual acuity (VA) worse than 6/9 11 (17%) showed thickening on the OCT, only 4 (6%) had macular oedema. None required laser. Out of 155 patients with maculopathy defined as any exudate within one DD of the fovea or circinate within two DD 45 (29%) showed thickening on the OCT of these 27% required laser. Conclusion: OCT is a useful tool in screening to help identify those who need a true referral to ophthalmology for maculopathy. If exudate is present the chance of having macular oedema and requiring laser treatment is greater than the presence of microaneurysms within one DD and reduced VA.

How accurate are photographic surrogate markers used to detect macular edema in the English national screening programme?

DESIGN. Retrospective analysis PURPOSE. Macular oedema is not directly visible on two dimensional digital photographs such that surrogate markers need to be used. In the English National Screening Programme these are exudate within one optic disc diameter (DD) of the fovea, group of exudates within two DD of the fovea and haemorrhages or microaneurysms (HMA) within one DD of the fovea with best corrected visual acuity (VA) worse than 6/9. All patients who present with any of these surrogate markers at screening are referred to an ophthalmology clinic for slit lamp examination. The purpose of this audit was to determine how many patients with positive maculopathy diagnosis on photography were truly identified by optical coherence tomography (OCT) with macular oedema. METHODS. Data was collected from patients attending digital diabetic retinopathy screening. Patients who presented with surrogate markers for macular oedema also had an OCT scan. The fast macula scan on the Stratus OCT was used and an ophthalmologist reviewed the scans to determine whether macular oedema was present. RESULTS. Maculopathy by exudates: Of 155 patients 45 (29%) showed thickening on the OCT of these 12 required laser. Those who also had pre-proliferative retinopathy (n=20) were more likely to have macular oedema (75%) than those with background diabetic retinopathy. Maculopathy by HMA and VA worse than 6/9: Of 66 patients 11 (16.7%) showed thickening on the OCT. 5 (7.6%) of these had macular oedema, 5 (7.6%) epi-retinal membrane, and 1 (1.5%) age related macular degeneration. None of these patients required laser. CONCLUSIONS. The likelihood of the presence of macular oedema and requiring laser treatment is greater with macular exudation than HMA within one DD and reduced VA. Overall the surrogate markers used show low specificity for macular oedema, however combining OCT with photography does identify those with macular oedema who require a true referral for an ophthalmological slit lamp examination.

Improving the cost-effectiveness of photographic screening for diabetic macular oedema:a prospective, multi-centre, UK study

Background/aims: Retinal screening programmes in England and Scotland have similar photographic grading schemes for background (non-proliferative) and proliferative diabetic retinopathy, but diverge over maculopathy. We looked for the most cost-effective method of identifying diabetic macular oedema from retinal photographs including the role of automated grading and optical coherence tomography, a technology that directly visualises oedema. Methods: Patients from seven UK centres were recruited. The following features in at least one eye were required for enrolment: microaneurysms/dot haemorrhages or blot haemorrhages within one disc diameter, or exudates within one or two disc diameters of the centre of the macula. Subjects had optical coherence tomography and digital photography. Manual and automated grading schemes were evaluated. Costs and QALYs were modelled using microsimulation techniques. Results: 3540 patients were recruited, 3170 were analysed. For diabetic macular oedema, England's scheme had a sensitivity of 72.6% and specificity of 66.8%; Scotland 's had a sensitivity of 59.5% and specificity of 79.0%. When applying a ceiling ratio of £30 000 per quality adjusted life years (QALY) gained, Scotland's scheme was preferred. Assuming automated grading could be implemented without increasing grading costs, automation produced a greater number of QALYS for a lower cost than England's scheme, but was not cost effective, at the study's operating point, compared with Scotland's. The addition of optical coherence tomography, to each scheme, resulted in cost savings without reducing health benefits. Conclusions: Retinal screening programmes in the UK should reconsider the screening pathway to make best use of existing and new technologies.

Improving the economic value of photographic screening for optical coherence tomography-detectable macular oedema:a prospective, multicentre, UK study

Objectives: To determine the best photographic surrogate markers for detecting sight-threatening macular oedema (MO) in people with diabetes attending UK national screening programmes. Design: A multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study of 3170 patients with photographic signs of diabetic retinopathy visible within the macular region [exudates within two disc diameters, microaneurysms/dot haemorrhages (M/DHs) and blot haemorrhages (BHs)] who were recruited from seven study centres. Setting: All patients were recruited and imaged at one of seven study centres in Aberdeen, Birmingham, Dundee, Dunfermline, Edinburgh, Liverpool and Oxford. Participants: Subjects with features of diabetic retinopathy visible within the macular region attending one of seven diabetic retinal screening programmes. Interventions: Alternative referral criteria for suspected MO based on photographic surrogate markers; an optical coherence tomographic examination in addition to the standard digital retinal photograph. Main outcome measures: (1) To determine the best method to detect sight-threatening MO in people with diabetes using photographic surrogate markers. (2) Sensitivity and specificity estimates to assess the costs and consequences of using alternative strategies. (3) Modelled long-term costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Results: Prevalence of MO was strongly related to the presence of lesions and was roughly five times higher in subjects with exudates or BHs or more than two M/DHs within one disc diameter. Having worse visual acuity was associated with about a fivefold higher prevalence of MO. Current manual screening grading schemes that ignore visual acuity or the presence of M/DHs could be improved by taking these into account. Health service costs increase substantially with more sensitive/less specific strategies. A fully automated strategy, using the automated detection of patterns of photographic surrogate markers, is superior to all current manual grading schemes for detecting MO in people with diabetes. The addition of optical coherence tomography (OCT) to each strategy, prior to referral, results in a reduction in costs to the health service with no decrement in the number of MO cases detected. Conclusions: Compared with all current manual grading schemes, for the same sensitivity, a fully automated strategy, using the automated detection of patterns of photographic surrogate markers, achieves a higher specificity for detecting MO in people with diabetes, especially if visual acuity is included in the automated strategy. Overall, costs to the health service are likely to increase if more sensitive referral strategies are adopted over more specific screening strategies for MO, for only very small gains in QALYs. The addition of OCT to each screening strategy, prior to referral, results in a reduction in costs to the health service with no decrement in the number of MO cases detected. © Queen's Printer and Controller of HMSO 2013.