Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

8 questions · 8 findings · 3 reviews · Eyes and Vision · Headline outcomes only

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 1 · 12.5%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 3 · 37.5%Low 4 · 50%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Standard treatment plus systemic corticosteroids vs usual care

Adverse effects: exposure keratopathy · patients age 10 years and older with periorbital or orbital cellulitis

It is very uncertain whether standard treatment plus systemic corticosteroids changes adverse effects: exposure keratopathy compared with standard treatment alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Corticosteroids for periorbital and orbital cellulitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.2 [0.4, 3.63]
1 study · 21 participants
Very low

Intervention not reported

Proportion of successful procedures at 1 year and up to 5 years after surgery (no exposure/extrusion) · people with anophthalmic sockets

The intervention showed no clear difference in proportion of successful procedures at 1 year and up to 5 years… (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Integrated versus non‐integrated orbital implants for treating anophthalmic sockets 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.92 [0.84, 1.01]
1 study · 150 participants
Low

0.5 vs 0.1 second exposure

Loss of ≥ 15 letters BCVA at 1 year · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

0.5 may leads to lower BCVA: loss of 15 or more EDTRS letters ‐ 1 year compared with 0.1 second exposure (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.42
1 study · 44 participants
Low

0.5 vs 0.1 second exposure

BCVA: gain of 15 or more ETDRS letters · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

0.5 showed no clear difference in BCVA: gain of 15 or more EDTRS letters ‐ 1 year compared with 0.1 second exposure (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 2.22 [0.68, 7.28]
1 study · 44 participants
Low

0.5 vs 0.1 second exposure

Progression of PDR · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

It is very uncertain whether 0.5 changes progression of PDR ‐ 1 year compared with 0.1 second exposure (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.33 [0.02, 7.14]
1 study · 16 participants
Very low

0.5 vs 0.1 second exposure

Regression of PDR · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

0.5 showed no clear difference in regression of PDR ‐ 1 year compared with 0.1 second exposure (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.17 [0.92, 1.48]
1 study · 32 participants
Low

0.5 vs 0.1 second exposure

Pain during laser treatment ‐ not reported · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

0.5 vs 0.1 second exposure

Adverse events · proliferative diabetic retinopathy

1 finding from 1 review

Different lasers and techniques for proliferative diabetic retinopathy 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 44 participants
Very low