Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16856079›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Interventions for stimulus deprivation amblyopia.

S Hatt, A Antonio-Santos, C Powell, S S Vedula

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Occlusion for stimulus deprivation amblyopia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Occlusion for stimulus deprivation amblyopia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  4. Conventional occlusion versus pharmacologic penalization for amblyopia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009
    Pooled it
  5. Amblyopia.BMJ clinical evidence · 2009
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Surgical interventions for bilateral congenital cataract.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2006
    Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Global processing in amblyopia: a review.Frontiers in psychology · 2014
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

S HattInternational Centre for Eye Health, c/o Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London, UK WC1E 7HT. sarahrhatt@gmail.com
A Antonio-Santos
C Powell
S S Vedula
Johns Hopkins University · USLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMichigan State University · USRoyal Victoria Infirmary · GB

Funding

COCHRANE EYE AND VISION GROUP-COORDINATING RESOURCE CENTER-260021003N01EY021003 · NEI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DICKERSIN, KAY · 2006 to 2006
–
NEI NIH HHS N01 EY021003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStimulus deprivation amblyopia (SDA) develops due to an obstruction to the clear passage of light, preventing clear formation of an image on the retina for example, cataract, ptosis (droopy eyelid). It is particularly severe and can be resistant to treatment and the visual prognosis is often poor. Stimulus deprivation amblyopia is rare and precise estimates of prevalence difficult to come by; it probably constitutes less than 3% of all cases of amblyopia. In developed countries most patients present under the age of one; in less developed parts of the world presentation is likely to be significantly later than this.The mainstay of treatment is patching of the better-seeing eye but regimes vary, treatment is difficult to execute and results are often disappointing.

objectivesThe objectives of this review were to evaluate the effectiveness of occlusion treatment for SDA, determine the optimum treatment regime and factors that may affect outcome. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials - CENTRAL (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group Trials Register) on The Cochrane Library (2006, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1996 to April 2006), EMBASE (1980 to April 2006) and LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences) (to November 2004). There were no date or language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We aimed to include randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of subjects with unilateral SDA defined as worse than 0.2 LogMAR or equivalent. There were no restrictions with respect to age, gender, ethnicity, co-morbidities, medication use, and the number of participants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed study abstracts identified by the electronic searches. MAIN

resultsNo trials were identified that met the inclusion criteria. AUTHORS'

conclusionsIt is not possible to conclude how effective treatment for SDA is or which treatment regime produces the best results. There is a need for further study in this area.

Indexed as

Occlusive DressingsAmblyopiaBlepharoptosisCataractChild, PreschoolHumansInfantTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID16856079
PMCPMC4257702
OpenAlexW1799131104

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.