Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23457327›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2013

Current treatments in diabetic macular oedema: systematic review and meta-analysis.

John Alexander Ford, Noemi Lois, Pamela Royle, Christine Clar, Deepson Shyangdan, Norman Waugh

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
12.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

47 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 122 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Aflibercept with adjuvant micropulsed yellow laser versus aflibercept monotherapy in diabetic macular edema.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2019
    Trial
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. LRG1: an emerging player in disease pathogenesis.Journal of biomedical science · 2022
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

John Alexander FordDepartment of Population Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Noemi Lois
Pamela Royle
Christine Clar
Deepson Shyangdan
Norman Waugh
University of Warwick · GBQueens University · BDUniversity of East Anglia · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of this systematic review is to appraise the evidence for the use of anti-VEGF drugs and steroids in diabetic macular oedema (DMO) as assessed by change in best corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness and adverse events DATA SOURCE: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science with Conference Proceedings and the Cochrane Library (inception to July 2012). Certain conference abstracts and drug regulatory web sites were also searched. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND

interventionsRandomised controlled trials were used to assess clinical effectiveness and observational trials were used for safety. Trials which assessed triamcinolone, dexamethasone, fluocinolone, bevacizumab, ranibizumab, pegaptanib or aflibercept in patients with DMO were included. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

methodsRisk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Study results are narratively described and, where appropriate, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis.

resultsAnti-VEGF drugs are effective compared to both laser and placebo and seem to be more effective than steroids in improving BCVA. They have been shown to be safe in the short term but require frequent injections. Studies assessing steroids (triamcinolone, dexamethasone and fluocinolone) have reported mixed results when compared with laser or placebo. Steroids have been associated with increased incidence of cataracts and intraocular pressure rise but require fewer injections, especially when steroid implants are used. LIMITATIONS: The quality of included studies varied considerably. Five of 14 meta-analyses had moderate or high statistical heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY

findingsThe anti-VEGFs ranibizumab and bevacizumab have consistently shown good clinical effectiveness without major unwanted side effects. Steroid results have been mixed and are usually associated with cataract formation and  intraocular pressure increase. Despite the current wider spectrum of treatments for DMO, only a small proportion of patients recover good vision (≥20/40), and thus the search for new therapies needs to continue.

Identifiers

PMID23457327
PMCPMC3612765
OpenAlexW2104740524

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.