ArticlePloS one2024
Cystoid macular edema prophylaxis in cataract surgery: A protocol for network meta-analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveCataracts are the leading cause of global preventable and treatable blindness. Cystoid macular edema (CME) is among the most common complications following cataract surgery. The development of CME impacts patients' quality of life and has economic implications for patients and healthcare systems. The purpose of this review is to synthesize the evidence from randomized controlled trials evaluating patients receiving prophylactic treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or corticosteroid medications to determine the comparative effectiveness of each specific regimen on retinal thickness, visual acuity, the development of CME, patient quality of life, intraocular pressure and adverse events following uncomplicated, age-related cataract surgery performed by phacoemulsification.
methodsA systematic review and random effects Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) will be performed and will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) extension statement for NMA. A comprehensive electronic search will be performed of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases, as well as of the ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registries. Data will be collected and synthesized for seven pre-specified outcomes at 6 weeks and 3 months following surgery: i) change in central retinal thickness measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT), ii) best-recorded visual acuity iii) the rate of CME measured by OCT, and fluorescein angiography (FA) iv) the rate of patients experiencing clinically significant macular edema defined as the presence of CME and pre-specified thresholds for decreased visual acuity, v) patient quality of life, vi) intraocular pressure and vii) the number of patients experiencing one or more pre-specified adverse events. The certainty of evidence for each outcome will be assessed using GRADE NMA guidelines. DISCUSSION: The results of this NMA will provide a comprehensive evaluation of the evidence for this critical question with significant clinical equipoise.
trial registrationSystematic Review Registration: PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42024531150.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.