International journal of rheumatic diseases · 2025
Association Between Retinopathy and Systemic Sclerosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Систематический обзорСтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fatemi Alireza, Taghipour Aylin, Yazdooei Yasmin, Fatemi Mahdis, Hashemi Akram, Abdolahi Nafiseh
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Studies have indicated a potential link between retinopathy and systemic sclerosis (SSc), but the precise nature of this association remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to synthesize available evidence to evaluate the relationship between SSc and retinopathy.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted across four major databases and gray literature to collect all relevant studies. The quality of the selected articles was assessed for risk of bias using standardized tools. A meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean difference (Std. Mean Difference) to estimate the association between retinopathy and SSc. Additional analyses for heterogeneity, sensitivity, subgroups, and publication bias were also conducted.
RESULTS: Twelve studies (359 cases, 314 controls) were included in the systematic review. A meta-analysis of eight studies found a nonsignificant and negligible association (pooled Std. Mean Difference = 0.08; 95% CI = -0.31 to 0.48; p = 0.67) between SSc and retinopathy, with no publication bias (p = 0.5362). Differences in Std. Mean Difference were observed in subgroup analyses but did not sufficiently explain the heterogeneity.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest no strong association between retinopathy and SSc. While some subgroup analyses revealed potential variations, they did not fully clarify the observed heterogeneity. Further research with larger, well-designed studies is necessary to determine whether retinopathy could serve as a biomarker for SSc.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER (PROSPERO): CRD42024529644 https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=529644.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted across four major databases and gray literature to collect all relevant studies. The quality of the selected articles was assessed for risk of bias using standardized tools. A meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean difference (Std. Mean Difference) to estimate the association between retinopathy and SSc. Additional analyses for heterogeneity, sensitivity, subgroups, and publication bias were also conducted.
RESULTS: Twelve studies (359 cases, 314 controls) were included in the systematic review. A meta-analysis of eight studies found a nonsignificant and negligible association (pooled Std. Mean Difference = 0.08; 95% CI = -0.31 to 0.48; p = 0.67) between SSc and retinopathy, with no publication bias (p = 0.5362). Differences in Std. Mean Difference were observed in subgroup analyses but did not sufficiently explain the heterogeneity.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest no strong association between retinopathy and SSc. While some subgroup analyses revealed potential variations, they did not fully clarify the observed heterogeneity. Further research with larger, well-designed studies is necessary to determine whether retinopathy could serve as a biomarker for SSc.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER (PROSPERO): CRD42024529644 https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=529644.