Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34858166›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in pharmacology2021

Efficacy and Safety of Various Treatments for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Bo Zhang, Zhulin Zhou, Bingjie Zhang, Dan Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Bo ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin, China.
Zhulin ZhouDepartment of Neurobiology, Care Sciences & Society, Division of Neurodegerneration, Karolinska Institutett, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden.
Bingjie ZhangDepartment of Ophthalmology, First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin, China.
Dan WangDepartment of Ophthalmology, First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin, China.
First Hospital of Jilin University · CNJilin University · CNKarolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diabetic retinopathy is the main cause of visual impairment and blindness. The proliferative diabetic retinopathy at the severe stage of diabetic retinopathy is more harmful to vision and even leads to total blindness. To evaluate the visual acuity, central retinal thickness, and adverse reactions of various treatments for proliferative diabetic retinopathy through a systematic network meta-analysis. The relevant research published in English or Chinese from January 1, 2011, to February 1, 2021, was systematically searched by using PubMed, science network, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and other electronic databases. A total of 15 studies were selected, including 3,222 eyes of PDR patients. Our results show that in terms of visual score improvement, ranibizumab alone (69.90%) and laser + ranibizumab (67.90%) are the best. However, if the groups were grouped again according to the dose and times of ranibizumab injection, the results showed that 0.5 mg ranibizumab injection per month (58.0%) had the best effect on vision improvement. For the change of central retinal thickness, the thickness decreased the most after the laser combined with ranibizumab (96.5%). After the same subgroup analysis, the results were further refined into the best effect of laser combined with 0.3 mg ranibizumab per quarter (72.7%). In addition, our analysis of complications also showed that the overall incidence of adverse reactions of PRP (11.1 ± 12.4, %) was greater than that of ranibizumab (10.6 ± 13.0, %). However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up using standard methods are still needed to verify the correlation.

Indexed as

anti-VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor)laser photocoagulationnetwork meta-analysisproliferative diabetic retinopathysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34858166
PMCPMC8630659
OpenAlexW3212028831

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.