Outcomes Evaluated in Randomized Controlled Trials of Treatments for Dry Eye: A Systematic Review.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Yuhui Wu, Michael X Lin, Daniel Shaughnessy, Riaz Qureshi, Ann-Margret Ervin, Tianjing Li, Esen K Akpek, Ian J Saldanha
{"title":"Outcomes Evaluated in Randomized Controlled Trials of Treatments for Dry Eye: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Yuhui Wu, Michael X Lin, Daniel Shaughnessy, Riaz Qureshi, Ann-Margret Ervin, Tianjing Li, Esen K Akpek, Ian J Saldanha","doi":"10.1097/ICO.0000000000004014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To initiate the process of core outcome set development for dry eye disease (DED) by conducting a systematic review of all outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of treatments for DED. A core outcome set is an agreed-upon minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials in a topic area.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed and Embase from January 1, 2016 to January 3, 2024 for RCTs of treatments for DED. Post hoc, we decided to focus on recent evidence and excluded RCTs published before 2016. Two independent investigators screened titles and abstracts (initially) and full-text articles (subsequently), resolving conflicts through discussion. We refined a previously developed outcome taxonomy for DED. We extracted all outcome domains and measurement instruments used for those domains in the included sample of RCTs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our searches identified 6477 unique records, and we included 300 RCTs. The most frequently used outcome domains across all RCTs were tear film stability (90.6% of RCTs), overall assessment of ocular symptoms (84.3%), corneal staining score (75.7%), tear production (66.0%), conjunctival staining score (39.7%), visual acuity (35.0%), meibomian gland plugging/clogging grade (27.0%), inferior tear film meniscus height (16.0%), and adverse events (28.0%). There was considerable inconsistency regarding measurement instruments.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Variability in outcome measures and instruments used underscores the need for a core outcome set for DED. Our next steps are to begin prioritizing the identified outcomes for a core outcome set for DED.</p>","PeriodicalId":10710,"journal":{"name":"Cornea","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cornea","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0000000000004014","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To initiate the process of core outcome set development for dry eye disease (DED) by conducting a systematic review of all outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of treatments for DED. A core outcome set is an agreed-upon minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials in a topic area.

Methods: We searched PubMed and Embase from January 1, 2016 to January 3, 2024 for RCTs of treatments for DED. Post hoc, we decided to focus on recent evidence and excluded RCTs published before 2016. Two independent investigators screened titles and abstracts (initially) and full-text articles (subsequently), resolving conflicts through discussion. We refined a previously developed outcome taxonomy for DED. We extracted all outcome domains and measurement instruments used for those domains in the included sample of RCTs.

Results: Our searches identified 6477 unique records, and we included 300 RCTs. The most frequently used outcome domains across all RCTs were tear film stability (90.6% of RCTs), overall assessment of ocular symptoms (84.3%), corneal staining score (75.7%), tear production (66.0%), conjunctival staining score (39.7%), visual acuity (35.0%), meibomian gland plugging/clogging grade (27.0%), inferior tear film meniscus height (16.0%), and adverse events (28.0%). There was considerable inconsistency regarding measurement instruments.

Conclusions: Variability in outcome measures and instruments used underscores the need for a core outcome set for DED. Our next steps are to begin prioritizing the identified outcomes for a core outcome set for DED.

干眼症治疗的随机对照试验结果评价:一项系统综述。
目的:通过对干眼病(DED)治疗的随机对照试验(rct)的所有结果进行系统评价,启动干眼病(DED)核心结局集的开发过程。核心结果集是在一个主题领域的所有临床试验中应测量和报告的商定的最小结果集。方法:检索2016年1月1日至2024年1月3日的PubMed和Embase,检索DED治疗的rct。事后,我们决定将重点放在最近的证据上,排除2016年之前发表的随机对照试验。两位独立的调查人员筛选标题和摘要(最初)和全文文章(随后),通过讨论解决冲突。我们改进了先前开发的DED结果分类法。我们提取了随机对照试验纳入样本中所有结果域和用于这些域的测量工具。结果:我们的搜索确定了6477条独特的记录,我们纳入了300个随机对照试验。在所有随机对照试验中,最常用的结果域是泪膜稳定性(90.6%)、眼部症状的总体评估(84.3%)、角膜染色评分(75.7%)、泪液产生(66.0%)、结膜染色评分(39.7%)、视力(35.0%)、睑板腺堵塞/堵塞等级(27.0%)、下泪膜半月板高度(16.0%)和不良事件(28.0%)。在测量仪器方面有相当大的不一致。结论:结果测量和使用的工具的可变性强调了对DED核心结果集的需求。我们接下来的步骤是开始为DED的核心成果集确定确定的结果的优先顺序。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cornea
Cornea 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
10.70%
发文量
354
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: For corneal specialists and for all general ophthalmologists with an interest in this exciting subspecialty, Cornea brings together the latest clinical and basic research on the cornea and the anterior segment of the eye. Each volume is peer-reviewed by Cornea''s board of world-renowned experts and fully indexed in archival format. Your subscription brings you the latest developments in your field and a growing library of valuable professional references. Sponsored by The Cornea Society which was founded as the Castroviejo Cornea Society in 1975.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信