BackgroundAge-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of blindness in Western countries. Numerous risk factors have been reported but the evidence and strength of association is variable. We aimed to identify those risk factors with strong levels of evidence which could be easily assessed by physicians or ophthalmologists to implement preventive interventions or address current behaviours.MethodsA systematic review identified 18 prospective and cross-sectional studies and 6 case control studies involving 113,780 persons with 17,236 cases of late AMD that included an estimate of the association between late AMD and at least one of 16 pre-selected risk factors. Fixed-effects meta-analyses were conducted for each factor to combine odds ratio (OR) and/or relative risk (RR) outcomes across studies by study design. Overall raw point estimates of each risk factor and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.ResultsIncreasing age, current cigarette smoking, previous cataract surgery, and a family history of AMD showed strong and consistent associations with late AMD. Risk factors with moderate and consistent associations were higher body mass index, history of cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and higher plasma fibrinogen. Risk factors with weaker and inconsistent associations were gender, ethnicity, diabetes, iris colour, history of cerebrovascular disease, and serum total and HDL cholesterol and triglyceride levels.ConclusionsSmoking, previous cataract surgery and a family history of AMD are consistent risk factors for AMD. Cardiovascular risk factors are also associated with AMD. Knowledge of these risk factors that may be easily assessed by physicians and general ophthalmologists may assist in identification and appropriate referral of persons at risk of AMD.

Additional research is needed to provide methodological guidance for future studies, especially for studies involving young children and parents' observational reports. As PRO data are increasingly used to support pediatric labeling claims, there will be more information regarding the standards by which these instruments will be judged. The use of PRO instruments in clinical trials and regulatory submissions will help ensure that children's experience of disease and treatment are accurately represented and considered in regulatory decisions.

OBJECTIVEThis meta-analysis reviews rates of progression of diabetic retinopathy to proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) and/or severe visual loss (SVL) and temporal trends.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSThis systematic literature review and meta-analysis of prospective studies assesses progression of retinopathy among diabetic patients without treatment for retinopathy at baseline. Studies published between 1975 to February 2008 were identified. Outcomes of interest were rates of progression to PDR and/or SVL. Pooled baseline characteristics and outcome measures were summarized using weighted averages of counts and means. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared between two periods: 1975–1985 and 1986–2008.RESULTSA total of 28 studies comprising 27,120 diabetic patients (mean age 49.8 years) were included. After 4 years, pooled incidence rates for PDR and SVL were 11.0 and 7.2%, respectively. Rates were lower among participants in 1986–2008 than in 1975–1985. After 10 years, similar patterns were observed. Participants in 1986–2008 studies had lower proportions of PDR and non-PDR at all time points than participants in 1975–1985 studies.CONCLUSIONSSince 1985, diabetic patients have lower rates of progression to PDR and SVL. These findings may reflect an increased awareness of retinopathy risk factors; earlier identification and initiation of care for patients with retinopathy; and improved medical management of glucose, blood pressure, and serum lipids. Differences in baseline characteristics, particularly in the prevalence and severity of retinopathy, could also have contributed to these temporal differences.

Our results support linezolid's ability to reduce medical resource use.

The BSW is a useful tool to capture patients' global impressions of three key elements of treatment outcome: a perceived benefit, satisfaction with treatment, and the willingness to continue treatment, and can facilitate patient-physician communication as well as be informative to researchers.