SynthesisGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2025
Cataract surgery risk stratification models: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2025. 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
purposeRisk stratification models can assist cataract surgeons in clinical decision-making by categorizing patients into distinct groups based on their likelihood of complications. In this systematic review, we assess the characteristics of cataract surgery risk stratification models.
methodsUsing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we searched six databases (PubMed, OVID, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Trials, and Web of Science) in January 2024. We included peer-reviewed, full-text, English-language studies describing models used preoperatively to assess the likelihood of complications in cataract surgery. We excluded letters, editorials, and non-peer-reviewed publications, such as conference abstracts and studies describing predictive models that did not group the patients into distinct risk categories. We constructed a checklist from three frameworks to critically appraise the participants, predictors, and risk of bias in the models.
resultsOf 4192 articles, eight met the inclusion criteria. Most models were designed for attending surgeons only and for phacoemulsification to predict zonular complications and posterior capsule rupture. The most common risk factors identified in the models were poor patient positioning, advanced age, small pupils, and pseudoexfoliation syndrome. Methodological limitations included the lack of multivariable modeling, standardized outcome measures, and external validation.
conclusionCataract surgeons should understand the limitations of cataract surgery risk stratification models. Existing models can be improved with more robust methods, the use of standardized metrics, and external validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39900805What 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.