Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33568093›Full record

SynthesisBMC ophthalmology2021

The effect of diabetes on corneal endothelium: a meta-analysis.

Kaikai Zhang, Liangliang Zhao, Chao Zhu, Weijin Nan, Xinfen Ding, Yuchen Dong, Meisheng Zhao

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Diabetic keratopathy and nuclear proteins (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. The impact of donor diabetes on corneal transplant immunity.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2023
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

7 authors.

Kaikai ZhangDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 13000, China.
Liangliang ZhaoDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 13000, China.
Chao ZhuDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 13000, China.
Weijin NanDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 13000, China.
Xinfen DingDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 13000, China.
Yuchen DongDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 13000, China.
Meisheng ZhaoDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 13000, China. zhaoms1961@sina.com.

Funding

Department of Science and Technology of Jilin Province 20080163
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis research was conducted with the aim to determine the effect of diabetes mellitus on corneal endothelial cells.

methodsThe terms: ("diabetes mellitus" or "diabetes" or "diabetic") and ("corneal endothelium" or "cornea" or "Corneas") searched in Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of science until August 2019. The included types of studies contained observational studies. The standard mean difference (SMD) which was deemed as main size effects for continuous data was calculated by means and standard deviations. The data on corneal endothelial cell density (ECD), mean cell area (MCA), cell area variation coefficient (CV) and percentage of hexagonal cells (HEX) included in the study were collected and analyzed using stata15.1.

resultsThe final 16 cross-sectional studies and 2 case-control studies were included for the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that diabetes mellitus could reduce ECD (SMD = - 0.352, 95% CI -0.538, - 0.166) and the HEX (SMD = - 0.145, 95% CI -0.217, - 0.074), in addition to increasing CV (SMD = 0.195, 95% CI 0.123, 0.268). Nevertheless, there was no statistically significant differences observed when combining MCA (SMD = 0.078, 95% CI -0.022, 0.178). In subgroup analysis, Type 2 diabetes patients owned less corneal ECD (P < 0.05). Moreover the same results also found during the subgroup form Asia, Europe and American. The meta-regression revealed the type of diabetes mellitus might be contributing to heterogeneity. (P = 0.008). The results indicated a significant publication bias for studies, with combined CV (Begg's test, P = 0.006; Egger's test, P = 0.005) and merged combined HEX (Begg's test, P = 0.113; Egger's test, P = 0.024).

conclusionsAs indicated by meta-analysis, diabetes mellitus could cause a detrimental effect on corneal endothelium health. Diabetes mellitus contributed to the instability of corneal endothelium during the analysis. Therefore, further research is considered necessary to confirm our research results.

trial registrationCED 42019145858 .

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2Endothelium, CornealCorneaCross-Sectional StudiesEndothelial CellsHumansCorneal endotheliumDiabetes mellitusMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID33568093
PMCPMC7874671

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.