ReviewCureus2025
Assessing Quality of Life and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Diabetic Macular Edema Treated With Anti-vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (Anti-VEGF) Agents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Anti-VEGF: Toward Integrated Precision Care in Diabetic Retinal Disease.Pharmaceutics · 2026Review
- Patient-Reported Visual Function and Vision-Related Quality of Life Across Ophthalmic Diseases: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diabetic macular edema (DME) is a leading cause of vision impairment, with profound effects on patients' quality of life (QoL). Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents are the current standard of care, but their impact on patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) remains incompletely understood. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one cohort study involving 1,793 participants, evaluating the effects of anti-VEGF therapy compared with sham injections or laser therapy on QoL as measured by the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25). Pooled analysis demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in composite QoL scores with anti-VEGF therapy (mean difference 3.11; 95% CI 1.89-4.33; p<0.00001), although the absolute magnitude of improvement was modest. Subgroup analysis revealed greater benefit compared with sham injections than with laser therapy, and long-term follow-up (24 months) showed more pronounced gains compared with shorter durations. Sensitivity analysis excluding the non-randomized study confirmed the robustness of these findings. While anti-VEGF therapy improves QoL in patients with DME, real-world barriers such as treatment burden, access, and cost may limit patient-perceived benefits. Future research should integrate patient-centered approaches to better capture the treatment impact beyond visual outcomes.
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.