Question · asked by 1 review

Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy vs conventional laser/cryotherapy: Recurrence of ROP (unit of analysis: eyes)

It is very uncertain whether anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy changes recurrence of ROP (unit of analysis: eyes) compared with conventional laser/cryotherapy (very low certainty).

What each review found

Include earlier review versions
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy vs conventional laser/cryotherapy
Recurrence of ROP (unit of analysis: eyes) · preterm infants with type 1 ROP
It is very uncertain whether anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor therapy changes recurrence of ROP (unit of analysis: eyes) compared with conventional laser/cryotherapy (very low certainty).
Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs for treatment of retinopathy of prematurity (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 5.36 [1.22, 23.5]2 studies · 188 participantsVery low

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

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Anti‐vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) drugs for treatment of retinopathy of prematurity
2018 · 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.