Review Article
Immediate Sequential Bilateral Cataract Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Table 4
Quality assessment and summary of findings.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; RR: risk ratio; ISBCS: immediate sequential bilateral cataract surgery; VF: visual function. GRADE working group grades of evidence are as follows. High quality: further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: we are very uncertain about the estimate. 1Studies were not blinded to outcome assessment. 2Very large differences between studies in the reported rates of complications. 3Studies do not have the sufficient size to reliably assess the number of serious but rare complications (e.g., endophthalmitis). |