Review Article

Color Doppler Imaging Analysis of Ocular Blood Flow Velocities in Normal Tension Glaucoma Patients: A Meta-Analysis

Table 1

PRISMA 2009 checklist.

Section/topic#Checklist itemReported on page #

Title
Title 1Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. 1

Abstract
Structured summary 2Provide a structured summary including, as applicable, background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and implications of key findings; systematic review registration number. 1

Introduction
Rationale 3Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. 1-2
Objectives 4Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS). 2

Methods
Protocol and registration 5Indicate if a review protocol exists and if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide registration information including registration number. NA
Eligibility criteria 6Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, language, and publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale. 2-3
Information sources 7Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage and contact with study authors to identify additional studies) in the search and date last searched. 2
Search 8Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be repeated. 2
Study selection 9State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening and eligibility included in systematic review and, if applicable, included in the meta-analysis). 2-3
Data collection process 10Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes for obtaining and confirming data from investigators. 3
Data items 11List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS and funding sources) and any assumptions and simplifications made. 3
Risk of bias in individual studies 12Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was done at the study or outcome level) and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis. 3
Summary measures 13State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio and difference in means). 3
Synthesis of results 14Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency (e.g., ) for each meta-analysis. 3
Risk of bias across studies 15Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (e.g., publication bias, selective reporting within studies). 3
Additional analyses 16Describe methods of additional analyses (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses and metaregression), if done, indicating which were prespecified. 5

Results
Study selection 17Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at each stage, ideally with a flow diagram. 5
Study characteristics 18For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (e.g., study size, PICOS, and follow-up period) and provide the citations. 5
Risk of bias within studies 19Present data on risk of bias of each study and, if available, any outcome level assessment (see Item 12). 6
Results of individual studies 20For all outcomes considered (benefits or harms), present, for each study, (a) simple summary data for each intervention group and (b) effect estimates and confidence intervals, ideally with a forest plot. 6
Synthesis of results 21Present results of each meta-analysis done, including confidence intervals and measures of consistency. 6, 10, 13
Risk of bias across studies 22Present results of any assessment of risk of bias across studies (see Item 15). 5
Additional analysis 23Give results of additional analyses, if done (e.g., sensitivity or subgroup analyses and metaregression [see Item 16]). 6, 10, 13

Discussion
Summary of evidence 24Summarize the main findings including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to key groups (e.g., healthcare providers, users, and policy makers). 13-14, 16, 18
Limitations 25Discuss limitations at study and outcome level (e.g., risk of bias) and at review level (e.g., incomplete retrieval of identified research and reporting bias). 18, 20
Conclusions 26Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence and implications for future research. 21

Funding
Funding 27Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the systematic review. 21

From [32].
For more information, visit http://www.prisma-statement.org/.