作者: Kristina Lindsley , Tianjing Li , Elizabeth Ssemanda , Gianni Virgili , Kay Dickersin
DOI: 10.1016/J.OPHTHA.2015.12.004
关键词:
摘要: Purpose Are existing systematic reviews of interventions for age-related macular degeneration incorporated into clinical practice guidelines? Design High-quality should be used to underpin evidence-based guidelines and care. We examined the reliability (AMD) described main findings reliable in relation guidelines. Methods Eligible publications were effectiveness treatment AMD. searched a database eyes vision without language or date restrictions; was up as May 6, 2014. Two authors independently screened records eligibility abstracted assessed characteristics methods each review. classified when they reported criteria, comprehensive searches, methodologic quality included studies, appropriate statistical meta-analysis, conclusions based on results. mapped recommendations from American Academy Ophthalmology (AAO) Preferred Practice Patterns (PPPs) AMD citations support recommendation. Results Of 1570 our database, 47 met inclusion criteria; most targeted neovascular investigated anti–vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) interventions, dietary supplements, photodynamic therapy. 33 (70%) reliable. The reporting varied, with criteria more often by Cochrane whose disclosed conflicts interest. Anti-VEGF agents therapy only identified effective reviews. 35 extracted PPPs, 15 could have been supported reviews; however, 1 recommendation cited intervention No review 20 recommendations, highlighting areas evidence gaps. Conclusions For AMD, exist many AAO PPPs these recommendations. also where no high-level exists. Mapping is one way highlight generation synthesis either available needed.