ReviewSurvey of ophthalmology
Prognostic factors for age-related macular degeneration progression: An overview of systematic reviews.
Review in Survey of ophthalmology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a progressive and irreversible degenerative disease of the retina. Slowing progression to late AMD is the only way to prevent vision loss. Given that AMD treatments are noncurative, understanding the personal characteristics associated with progression is of critical importance for people with increased AMD risk. We conducted an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses (SRMAs) to assess the scope of the existing literature on prognostic factors (PFs) for AMD progression. We included all systematic reviews of PFs for the progression of AMD from early or intermediate to late. We used the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Database of Systematic Reviews (current to September, 2024). We identified 64 potentially relevant studies in the database and included 17 SRMAs, which most commonly studied functional or structural ocular (10/17), lifestyle (7/17), and intervention-related factors (7/17). Across all reviews, 218 PFs were reported. We extracted 79 and grouped these into 20 distinct types of PFs across 8 categories. The modifiable PFs with most evidence for slowing progression were increased dietary supplementation with antioxidants and multivitamins and reduced smoking. Most PFs were non modifiable. Although most PFs may not be targetable, by integrating high-risk optical coherence tomography findings, monitoring relevant comorbidities, and considering individual lesion characteristics, clinicians may better predict disease trajectories and support patients in slowing progression and preserving vision. Notably, no reviews studied social determinants as potential PFs for AMD progression, representing a critical gap in the evidence base. Future reviews should investigate social, systemic, and AI-identified biomarkers to provide a more comprehensive understanding of AMD progression.
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.