Question · asked by 0 reviews

Non‐pharmaceutical interventions vs usual care: Visual acuity

Non‐pharmaceutical interventions showed no clear difference in short‐term visual acuity between 20/20 and 20/60 at end of… compared with usual care (low certainty).

What each review found

Current versions only
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Non‐pharmaceutical interventions vs usual care
Short‐term visual acuity between 20/20 and 20/60 at end of treatment; monocular versus binocular eye patching · people with traumatic hyphema
Non‐pharmaceutical interventions showed no clear difference in short‐term visual acuity between 20/20 and 20/60 at end of… compared with usual care (low certainty).
Medical interventions for traumatic hyphema (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD005431.PUB4, superseded
RR 0.82 [0.67, 1]1 study · 46 participantsLow
Non‐pharmaceutical interventions vs usual care
Final visual acuity between 20/20 and 20/50; monocular versus binocular eye patching · people with traumatic hyphema
Non‐pharmaceutical interventions showed no clear difference in final visual acuity between 20/20 and 20/50; monocular versus… compared with usual care (low certainty).
Medical interventions for traumatic hyphema (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD005431.PUB4, superseded
RR 0.95 [0.77, 1.18]1 study · 53 participantsLow
Non‐pharmaceutical interventions vs usual care
Short‐term visual acuity between 20/20 and 20/50 at end of treatment; ambulatory versus bed rest · people with traumatic hyphema
Non‐pharmaceutical interventions showed no clear difference in short‐term visual acuity between 20/20 and 20/50 at end of… compared with usual care (low certainty).
Medical interventions for traumatic hyphema (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD005431.PUB4, superseded
RR 1.1 [0.84, 1.44]1 study · 52 participantsLow

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Medical interventions for traumatic hyphema
2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
Not reportedlist not extracted yetNot assessed

Studies behind the findings

None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.

How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.