Question · asked by 1 review
Blue‐light filtering intraocular lenses (IOL) vs non blue‐light filtering IOL: Proportion of participants with adverse events with a probable causal link with the study interventions at six months
- Population
- adults undergoing cataract surgery with IOL implantation
- Intervention
- Blue‐light filtering intraocular lenses (IOL)
- Comparison
- non blue‐light filtering IOL
- Outcome
- Proportion of participants with adverse events with a probable causal link with the study interventions at six months
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Blue‐light filtering intraocular lenses (IOL) vs non blue‐light filtering IOL Proportion of participants with adverse events with a probable causal link with the study interventions at six months · adults undergoing cataract surgery with IOL implantation The review found no eligible studies for this question. Blue‐light filtering intraocular lenses (IOLs) for protecting macular health (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blue‐light filtering intraocular lenses (IOLs) for protecting macular health 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
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.