Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

2,079 questions · 2,112 findings · 171 reviews · Eyes and Vision

No studies found 587 · 27.8%GRADE not reported 95 · 4.5%Very low 446 · 21.1%Low 557 · 26.4%Moderate 361 · 17.1%High 66 · 3.1%

Summary of findings: bevacizumab vs ranibizumab

No problems in quality of life domains at one year · people with neovascular age‐related macular degeneration

Summary of findings: bevacizumab showed no clear difference in no problems in quality of life domains at 1 year compared with ranibizumab (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: bevacizumab vs ranibizumab

Serious systemic adverse events at one year · people with neovascular age‐related macular degeneration

Summary of findings: bevacizumab showed no clear difference in serious systemic adverse events at 1 yearb compared with ranibizumab (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: bevacizumab vs ranibizumab

BCVA: gain of 15 or more ETDRS letters · people with neovascular age‐related macular degeneration

Summary of findings: bevacizumab showed no clear difference in gain of 15 or more letters visual acuity at 1 year compared with ranibizumab (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: bevacizumab vs ranibizumab

Loss of fewer than 15 letters visual acuity at one year · people with neovascular age‐related macular degeneration

Summary of findings: bevacizumab showed no clear difference in loss of fewer than 15 letters visual acuity at 1 year compared with ranibizumab (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization

Visual acuity · Participants of any age with either unilateral strabismic, anisometropic, or mixed (strabismic‐refractive) amblyopia; deprivation…
2 findings from 1 review

Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization

Ocular alignment (different measures and time points reported in the included studies) Assessed at different time points (17 weeks, 24 months, or cessation of treatment) and by the proportions of participants who developed strabismus, showed chang... · Participants of any age with either unilateral strabismic, anisometropic, or mixed (strabismic‐refractive) amblyopia; deprivation…
1 finding from 1 review

Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization

Stereo acuity (different measures and time points reported in the included studies) Assessed at different time points (17 weeks, 6 months, 2 years, or at cessation of treatment) and using different measures (TNO stereo test, Titmus fly test, Rando... · Participants of any age with either unilateral strabismic, anisometropic, or mixed (strabismic‐refractive) amblyopia; deprivation…
1 finding from 1 review

Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization

Quality of life (different measures and time points reported in the included studies) Assessed at different time points (17 weeks or 6 months) by patient preference or the Amblyopia Treatment Index questionnaire. · Participants of any age with either unilateral strabismic, anisometropic, or mixed (strabismic‐refractive) amblyopia; deprivation…
1 finding from 1 review

Conventional occlusion vs atropine penalization

Adverse events (reported occurrence of: mild reduction in the visual acuity of the sound eye not requiring treatment; light sensitivity; skin, lid, or conjunctival irritation) Assessed at different time points (17 weeks or 2 years). · Participants of any age with either unilateral strabismic, anisometropic, or mixed (strabismic‐refractive) amblyopia; deprivation…
1 finding from 1 review