Workforce & geographic access
Identify trained specialists, screening and treatment services, and gaps in geographic access.
NEONATAL EYE CARE · RESEARCH
Global Retinopathy of Prematurity Observatory
Build the evidence to reach more infants at risk of preventable blindness.
Clinical research, health economics and workforce mapping connect screening, treatment and geographic access to ROP care. Each project has its own protocol, team and review pathway.
OUR SCIENTIFIC AGENDA
A connected programme of work.
Clinical evidence
Develop observational studies and governed collaborative trials with project-specific approvals.
Economics & innovation
Evaluate costs, outcomes and investigational tools to support neonatal eye-care decisions.
NEW PREPRINT · ROP
Under peer review in Scientific ReportsRetinopathy of prematurity care in Colombia: workforce distribution, geographic accessibility, and emerging practice patterns
New preprint linked by Observatory leadership. The submission is under peer review in Scientific Reports; it has not been accepted as a journal article.
Read the preprint ↗Findings in the deposited abstract
- 54 providers · September 2025
- 29 pediatric ophthalmologists and 25 retina specialists across 51 of 1,103 municipalities.
- More than 120 minutes away
- 41.60% of the modeled population from pediatric ophthalmologists; 46.30% from retina specialists.
Interpretation & limitations
Cross-sectional modeled geographic access; it does not determine actual appointment availability or current clinical capacity. The registry snapshot is September 2025.
Author-deposited Crossref abstract reviewed 3 October 2026. Full-text review remains pending.
Scientific Reports ↗
Nature Portfolio · Springer Nature
Journal-level metric, not a manuscript assessment. Submission or review does not imply acceptance.Know the collaboration before you join.
Protocols, participating institutions, roles, data rights, IP and economic arrangements are documented for each project and may require negotiation with investigators and stakeholders.
Review the scientific collaboration framework →EVIDENCE & OUTPUTS
Follow the research, with its current status.
Preprint available
Economic evaluation of topical NSAID prophylaxis for early-stage ROP
This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of topical ketorolac and nepafenac prophylaxis for early-stage retinopathy of prematurity using multicenter real-world clinical and economic data from Colombia.
Findings in the deposited abstract
- 192 infants
- Separate comparisons of each agent with historical surveillance.
- Cost-effectiveness probability
- 71.90% for ketorolac and 68.16% for nepafenac at the study threshold. Cost differences were not statistically significant.
Interpretation & limitations
Retrospective cohort; associations and economic models do not prove causality. Prophylaxis comparisons use historical controls. These preliminary findings do not recommend routine adoption or replace clinical evaluation or prospective trials.
Author-deposited Crossref abstract reviewed 3 October 2026. Full-text review remains pending.
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation ↗
Springer Nature
Journal-level metric, not a manuscript assessment. Submission or review does not imply acceptance.Preprint available
Real-world clinical evidence for topical NSAID prophylaxis in early ROP
This study evaluates real-world clinical outcomes associated with topical ketorolac and nepafenac prophylaxis for early-stage retinopathy of prematurity across a multicenter care network in Colombia.
Findings in the deposited abstract
- 192 infants
- 48 ketorolac, 98 nepafenac and 46 historical surveillance comparators across 14 institutions.
- Treatment-requiring ROP
- 20.83%, 22.45% and 45.65%, respectively. Estimated NNT: 4 for each agent.
Interpretation & limitations
Retrospective cohort; associations and economic models do not prove causality. Prophylaxis comparisons use historical controls. These preliminary findings do not recommend routine adoption or replace clinical evaluation or prospective trials.
Author-deposited Crossref abstract reviewed 3 October 2026. Full-text review remains pending.
BMC Pediatrics ↗
Springer Nature
Journal-level metric, not a manuscript assessment. Submission or review does not imply acceptance.Preprint available
Cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab versus ranibizumab for treatment-requiring ROP
This study compares the cost-effectiveness of bevacizumab and ranibizumab for treatment-requiring retinopathy of prematurity using multicenter real-world clinical and economic data.
Findings in the deposited abstract
- 121 infants
- 47 bevacizumab and 74 ranibizumab, across 14 institutions.
- Retreatment
- 6.38% vs. 48.65%; economic model favored bevacizumab under the study assumptions.
Interpretation & limitations
Retrospective cohort; associations and economic models do not prove causality. Prophylaxis comparisons use historical controls. These preliminary findings do not recommend routine adoption or replace clinical evaluation or prospective trials.
Author-deposited Crossref abstract reviewed 3 October 2026. Full-text review remains pending.
Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation ↗
Springer Nature
Journal-level metric, not a manuscript assessment. Submission or review does not imply acceptance.INVESTIGATIONAL AI · EXPANDING CAPACITY
Flag suspected cases. Refer in time.
We are developing a support tool for neonatologists, neonatal nurses, general practitioners and other primary-care staff. Its purpose is to flag images potentially compatible with ROP and facilitate timely specialist assessment.
- Trained staff acquire images under an authorized protocol and check image quality.
- AI flags a possible suspicion or an image needing review; it does not diagnose ROP.
- The clinical pathway supports referral to pediatric ophthalmology, retina/vitreous specialists or other clinicians trained in ROP.
- The responsible clinician establishes diagnosis, decides care and maintains indicated surveillance. An unflagged result does not exclude ROP or cancel follow-up.
Development project: performance, external validation, safety and regulatory requirements must be assessed before clinical use. No unverified sensitivity, specificity or authorization is claimed.
PROFESSIONAL SCIENTIFIC MEMBERSHIP
Turn your expertise into neonatal research.
For neonatologists, pediatric ophthalmologists, retina specialists, investigators and other professionals with relevant ROP, neonatal-care or health-system expertise.
Until the Executive Director is appointed, address membership requests to Jorge Racedo, Managing Director, at jorge.racedo@microscopiatech.com. microscopIA coordinates assessment and the necessary clinical review. Membership requires written approval; each project is reviewed separately.
Research development
One case report or case-series development pathway every two active membership months, with methodological and publication support. microscopIA covers approved Observatory publication fees. Journal acceptance and publication dates remain editorial decisions.
Lead an approved review
Propose a systematic review with meta-analysis where appropriate. Approved projects receive an agreed microscopIA team, execution capacity and budget. The proposing member is expected to lead as PI and planned first author, subject to actual contribution and authorship criteria.
Expert collaboration
Apply to ongoing reviews, trials and scoping reviews through the project PI. Members receive priority consideration for expert invitations in Observatory and microscopIA-governed projects; selection depends on expertise, project needs and approvals.
Affiliation & researcher profile
Use the approved Observatory affiliation for authorized work. Receive a microscopIA researcher profile and certificates of verified participation. Support for eligible CvLAC/GrupLAC records is included; Ministry recognition or classification is independently determined.
Research Elite included
All Research Elite benefits are included without a second membership fee, under the applicable booking, availability and eligibility rules. Community pilots, AI, innovation and device projects have separate eligibility and approvals.
50% service discount
Active members receive 50% off microscopIA service fees for their projects outside the Observatory. Request a written quote showing the regular fee, discount, taxes and any third-party costs before commissioning work. Discounts do not stack.
Benefits apply to approved ROP projects. Authorized affiliation: “Global Retinopathy of Prematurity Observatory, microscopIA, Bogotá, Colombia”. Membership does not purchase authorship or guarantee journal acceptance.
From application to the first project
- Send your English CV, relevant expertise and joint-project proposal.
- Suitability, ethics, conflicts, feasibility and capacity are assessed. Receive a decision or information request within 14 calendar days.
- After approval, receive the terms and activation instructions. No payment is requested during review.
- The Executive Director approves each proposal and notifies microscopIA to initiate execution. Agree responsibilities, team, budget and the work plan before activities begin.
FOR CLINICIANS & SCIENTIFIC COLLABORATORS
Bring your expertise. Shape the next question.
Connect neonatal and ophthalmic expertise with screening pathways, workforce mapping and outcomes research.
Clinical expertise
Define meaningful questions, outcomes and interpretation.
Discuss this contribution →Regional collaboration
Discuss local service mapping, feasibility and institutional coordination.
Discuss this contribution →Methods & policy
Contribute to evidence appraisal, modelling or decision briefs.
Discuss this contribution →WORK WITH THE PROGRAMME
Choose how to take part.
Explore collaboration, project participation and responsible funding through the programme’s existing pathways.
PHILANTHROPY & PARTNERSHIP
Support the work. Expand what is possible.
Individuals, families, institutions and funders can make a one-time contribution or discuss recurring support. Contributions are separate from membership and preserve scientific independence.
From proposal to execution
Every new research project, case report, case series or innovation proposal requires written approval from the corresponding Observatory Executive Director or research group principal investigator. Admission or membership does not replace this approval.
- Submit the aim, methods, proposed team, data, resources and expected outputs to the responsible scientific authority.
- The scientific authority reviews and approves the proposal, documenting its scope and conditions.
- Once approved, the Executive Director or principal investigator notifies microscopIA to initiate execution of the approved project.
- microscopIA coordinates responsibilities, staff, budget, milestones and data/IP agreements. Activities begin with the required ethics, institutional and regulatory permissions in place.
If leadership is vacant, microscopIA coordinates proposal intake and review; execution awaits approval from a formally designated scientific authority.
Protocols and collaboration agreementsGOVERNMENTS, INSTITUTIONS & COMMUNITIES
Turn a health-system need into a programme of work.
Governments & policymakers
Work with microscopIA on access evaluation, capacity planning, economic analysis, evidence synthesis or programme evaluation. Agree the decision question, methods, data, deliverables and timetable.
Discuss a collaboration →Propose an observatory or initiative
Describe the aim, population and geography, unmet need and proposed Executive Director—you may nominate yourself. Include expertise, methods, expected outputs, partners, resources, funding needs and timeline.
Prepare an email proposal →Jorge Racedo · Managing Director
jorge.racedo@microscopiatech.com
Proposals are evaluated before establishing an initiative, appointment or budget. Send a professional summary without identifiable patient information. Discuss recurring support