Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26872918›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2016

The effectiveness of pharmacological agents for the treatment of uveitic macular oedema (UMO): a systematic review protocol.

Mohammad O Tallouzi, David J Moore, Melanie Calvert, Philip I Murray, Nicholas Bucknall, Alastair K Denniston

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mohammad O TallouziInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. mxt500@bham.ac.uk.
David J MooreInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. d.j.moore@bham.ac.uk.
Melanie CalvertInstitute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK. m.calvert@bham.ac.uk.
Philip I MurrayInstitute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. p.i.murray@bham.ac.uk.
Nicholas BucknallBirdshot Uveitis Society representative, Birmingham, UK. nickbucknell@hotmail.co.uk.
Alastair K DennistonDepartment of Ophthalmology, Queen Elizabeth hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2WB, UK. a.denniston@bham.ac.uk.
University of Birmingham · GBUniversity Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Department of Health CDRF-2014-05-057Medical Research Council G0600416
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMacular oedema (MO) describes the accumulation of fluid in the central part of the retina, known as the 'macula' which provides central vision. MO is the leading cause of sight loss in patients with intraocular inflammation (uveitis). There is a lack of consensus over the treatment of uveitic macular oedema (UMO). The proposed systematic review will evaluate the evidence on the effectiveness of pharmacological agents used to treat UMO. All systemic, local, or topical pharmacological agents will be included. METHOD/

designStandard systematic review methodology will be employed to identify, select and extract data from comparative studies (randomised/non-randomised trials and observational studies) of the pharmacological interventions in patients with UMO. Searches will be conducted through bibliographic databases (Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL) and clinical trials registers. No restriction will be placed on either language or year of publication. Translation of non-English language articles will be undertaken to minimise selection bias. The primary outcome of interest will be best corrected visual acuity and secondary outcomes will be adverse events, health-related quality of life, assessment of UMO using central macular thickness (e.g. by optical coherence topography (OCT)), clinical and angiographic assessment of UMO, clinical estimation of vitreous haze. Risk of bias assessment appropriate to each study design will be undertaken. Data will be grouped by comparison, tabulated and narratively synthesised. Meta-analysis will be undertaken where clinical and methodological homogeneity exists. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses, also network analyses and intra/inter-pharmacological class analyses will be undertaken where deemed appropriate. DISCUSSION: A number of published studies have investigated the effectiveness of the pharmacological agents used to treat UMO. However, there is no recent systematic review that synthesises this evidence. This systematic review will analyse the effectiveness of systemic, local and topical therapies to treat UMO. The findings will provide important evidence to inform clinical and health policy decision-making for the treatment of UMO. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Prospero CRD42015019170.

Indexed as

Adrenal Cortex HormonesAngiogenesis InhibitorsCarbonic Anhydrase InhibitorsHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsMacular EdemaMeta-Analysis as TopicSystematic Reviews as TopicTreatment OutcomeTumor Necrosis Factor-alphaUveitisAdrenal Cortex HormonesAngiogenesis InhibitorsCarbonic Anhydrase InhibitorsImmunosuppressive AgentsTumor Necrosis Factor-alpha

Identifiers

PMID26872918
PMCPMC4752778
OpenAlexW2263491820

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.