ReviewJournal of current ophthalmology
Efficacy of Different Concentrations of Autologous Serum Eye Drops in the Treatment of Ocular Surface Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of current ophthalmology. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of different autologous serum eye drop (ASED) concentrations in treating ocular surface diseases. Methods: All articles assessing the efficacy of 20%, 50%, or 100% ASED were retrieved from PubMed, Cochrane, ScienceDirect, and EBSCO electronic databases and checked for applicability. Efficacy was evaluated based on symptom scoring, corneal staining, and tear film stability, which includes tear break-up time (TBUT) and the Schirmer's test. Results: Seven randomized clinical trials, three cohort studies, and one prospective study were included in this review. ASED significantly improved subjective ocular symptoms (overall standardized mean differences [SMD]: -2.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.38 to -1.60), without significant difference between 20%, 50%, and 100% concentrations ( Conclusion: ASED was effective in improving subjective ocular symptoms, tear break-up time, and keratoepitheliopathy across different concentrations but did not significantly affect Schirmer's test.
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.