Approaches for delivery of refractive and optical care services in community and primary care settings.

BACKGROUND: Uncorrected refractive error is a leading cause of vision impairment which, in most cases, can be managed with the appropriate spectacle correction. In 2021, the World Health Assembly endorsed a global target of a 40-percentage-point increase in effective coverage of refractive error by 2030. To achieve this global target, equitable access to refractive and optical services within community and primary care settings needs to be strengthened. This review will inform the development of technical guidance to support improvements in the testing and correction of refractive error among World Health Organization (WHO) member states. OBJECTIVES: To determine the range of approaches for delivery of refractive and optical care services in community and primary care settings, and the methods employed for their evaluation. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Global Health databases, grey literature, and annual reports and websites of relevant organizations involved in eye-care delivery from January 2002 to November 2022 to identify approaches for refractive and optical service delivery. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included observational and interventional studies, reviews, and reports from relevant organizations related to delivering refractive services and optical services for preschool and school-aged children and adults in community and primary care settings published between January 2002 and November 2022. We searched for studies and reports published within the last 20 years because vision impairment due to uncorrected refractive error has only recently become a public health and eye health priority, therefore we did not expect to find much relevant literature until after 2002. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors screened titles, abstracts and full texts, and extracted data. We resolved any discrepancies through discussion. We synthesized data, and presented results as tables, figures, and case studies. This project was led by the World Health Organization (WHO) Vision and Eye Care Programme. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 175 studies from searches of databases and grey literature, 146 records from company reports, and 81 records from website searches of relevant organizations that matched our inclusion criteria. Delivery approaches for refractive and optical services in community care included school-based, pharmacy, and outreach models, whereas primary care approaches comprised vision centre, health centre, and a combination of vision or health centre and door-to-door delivery. In community care, school-based and outreach approaches were predominant, while in primary care, a vision-centre approach was mainly used. In the WHO African region, the school-based and outreach approaches were mainly reported while, in the Americas, the outreach approach was mostly used. Very few approaches for service delivery were reported in the WHO Eastern Mediterranean region. Prominent gaps exist in the evaluation of the approaches, and few studies attempted to evaluate the approaches for delivery of refractive and optical care services. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We comprehensively describe a range of approaches for delivery of refractive and optical services in community and primary care. Further evaluation of their effectiveness will better inform the application of these service-delivery approaches. The study outcomes will help guide WHO member states in strengthening refractive and optical services at community and primary care levels. FUNDING: This scoping review was supported by the Vision and Eye care Programme, World Health Organization and ATscale Global Partnership. REGISTRATION: The protocol of this scoping review was published in the Open Source Framework.

Identification and critical appraisal of evidence for interventions for refractive error to support the development of the WHO package of eye care interventions: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines.

PURPOSE: The World Health Organization is developing a Package of Eye Care Interventions (PECI) to support the integration of eye health care into national health programmes. Interventions included in the PECI should be based on robust evidence where available. Refractive error is a leading cause of blindness and vision impairment and is a PECI priority condition. The aim of this study was to provide high-quality evidence to support the development of the PECI by identifying and critically appraising clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), and extracting recommendations for refractive error interventions. METHODS: We searched for CPGs on refractive error published in the last 10 years. We conducted the searches initially in February and March 2019 and repeated them in March 2020. We evaluated the quality of potentially relevant guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool. RESULTS: We identified 12 high-quality CPGs relevant to refractive error, written by six organisations from three high-income countries. Organisations used a variety of frameworks to assess the strength of recommendations based on available evidence, with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) being most common. Vision screening for children aged 3 to 5 years was recommended consistently. Evidence for screening and eye evaluations at other ages was weaker, although ophthalmic professional organisations consistently recommended regular evaluations. Recommendations on optical and laser correction of refractive error were limited and did not consider implications for low resource settings. Interventions for slowing myopia progression in children were recommended, but these will need regular updating as new evidence emerges. CONCLUSIONS: Current high-quality guidelines on refractive error have been formulated in high-income countries. Recommendations focused on prevention and treatment of refractive error in low-and middle-income countries are lacking. Regular updating of systematic reviews and CPGs is essential to ensure that robust evidence is promptly appraised and incorporated into recommendations for eye health care practitioners.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for diabetic macular oedema: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is a common complication of diabetic retinopathy. Antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) can reduce oedema, improve vision and prevent further visual loss. These drugs have replaced laser photocoagulation as the standard of care for people with DMO. OBJECTIVES: The 2014 update of this review found high-quality evidence of benefit with anti-VEGF modalities, compared to laser photocoagulation, for the treatment of DMO. The objective of this updated review is to compare the effectiveness and safety of the different anti-VEGF drugs using network meta-analysis methods. SEARCH METHODS: We searched various electronic databases on 26 April 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any anti-angiogenic drug with an anti-VEGF mechanism of action versus another anti-VEGF drug, another treatment, sham or no treatment in people with DMO. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods for pair-wise meta-analysis and we augmented this evidence using network meta-analysis methods. We focused on the relative efficacy and safety of the three most commonly used drugs as interventions of direct interest for practice: aflibercept and ranibizumab, used on-label; and off-label bevacizumab.We collected data on three efficacy outcomes (gain of 15 or more Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters; mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA); mean change in central retinal thickness (CRT)), three safety outcomes (all severe systemic adverse events (SSAEs); all-cause death; arterial thromboembolic events) and quality of life.We used Stata 'network' meta-analysis package for all analyses. We investigated the risk of bias of mixed comparisons based on the variance contribution of each study, having assigned an overall risk of bias to each study. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-four studies included 6007 participants with DMO and moderate vision loss, of which two studies randomised 265 eyes of 230 participants and one was a cross-over study on 56 participants (62 eyes) that was treated as a parallel-arm trial. Data were collected on drugs of direct interest from three studies on aflibercept (975 eyes), eight studies on bevacizumab (515 eyes), and 14 studies on ranibizumab (1518 eyes). As treatments of indirect interest or legacy treatment we included three studies on pegaptanib (541 eyes), five studies on ranibizumab plus prompt laser (557 eyes), one study on ranibizumab plus deferred laser (188 eyes), 13 studies on laser photocoagulation (936 eyes) and six studies on sham treatment (793 eyes).Aflibercept, bevacizumab and ranibizumab were all more effective than laser for improving vision by 3 or more lines after one year (high-certainty evidence). Approximately one in 10 people improve vision with laser, and about three in 10 people improve with anti-VEGF treatment: risk ratio (RR) versus laser 3.66 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.79 to 4.79) for aflibercept; RR 2.47 (95% CI 1.81 to 3.37) for bevacizumab; RR 2.76 (95% CI 2.12 to 3.59) for ranibizumab. On average there was no change in visual acuity (VA) with laser after one year, compared with a gain of 1 or 2 lines with anti-VEGF treatment: laser versus aflibercept mean difference (MD) -0.20 (95% CI -0.22 to -0.17) logMAR; versus bevacizumab MD -0.12 (95% CI -0.15 to -0.09) logMAR; versus ranibizumab MD -0.12 (95% CI -0.14 to -0.10) logMAR. The certainty of the evidence was high for the comparison of aflibercept and ranibizumab with laser and moderate for bevacizumab comparison with laser due to inconsistency between the indirect and direct evidence.People receiving ranibizumab were less likely to gain 3 or more lines of VA at one year compared with aflibercept: RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.94), moderate-certainty evidence. For every 1000 people treated with aflibercept, 92 fewer would gain 3 or more lines of VA at one year if treated with ranibizumab (22 to 148 fewer). On average people receiving ranibizumab had worse VA at one year (MD 0.08 logMAR units, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.11), moderate-certainty evidence; and higher CRT (MD 39 µm, 95% CI 2 µm to 76 µm; low-certainty evidence). Ranibizumab and bevacizumab were comparable with respect to aflibercept and did not differ in terms of VA: RR of gain of 3 or more lines of VA at one year 1.11 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.43), moderate-certainty evidence, and difference in change in VA was 0.00 (95% CI -0.02 to 0.03) logMAR, moderate-certainty evidence. CRT reduction favoured ranibizumab by -29 µm (95% CI -58 µm to -1 µm, low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of overall statistical inconsistency in our analyses.The previous version of this review found moderate-certainty evidence of good safety of antiangiogenic drugs versus control. This update used data at the longest available follow-up (one or two years) and found that aflibercept, ranibizumab and bevacizumab do not differ regarding systemic serious adverse events (SSAEs) (moderate- or high-certainty evidence). However, risk of bias was variable, loop inconsistency could be found and estimates were not precise enough on relative safety regarding less frequent events such as arterial thromboembolic events or death (low- or very low-certainty evidence).Two-year data were available and reported in only four RCTs in this review. Most industry-sponsored studies were open-label after one year. One large publicly-funded study compared the three drugs at two years and found no difference. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Anti-VEGF drugs are effective at improving vision in people with DMO with three to four in every 10 people likely to experience an improvement of 3 or more lines VA at one year. Aflibercept may confer some advantage over ranibizumab and bevacizumab in people with DMO at one year in visual and anatomic terms but it is unclear whether this applies to the long-term. There is a need for more evidence on the long-term (greater than two years) comparative effects of these anti-VEGF agents. Evidence from RCTs may not apply to real-world practice, where people in need of antiangiogenic treatment are often under-treated and under-monitored.We found no signals of differences in overall safety between the three antiangiogenic drugs that are currently available to treat DMO, but our estimates are imprecise for cardiovascular events and death.

Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor for diabetic macular oedema: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic macular oedema (DMO) is a common complication of diabetic retinopathy. Antiangiogenic therapy with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) modalities can reduce oedema and thereby improve vision and prevent further visual loss. These drugs have replaced laser photocoagulation as the standard of care for people with DMO. OBJECTIVES: The 2014 update of this review found high-quality evidence of benefit with antiangiogenic therapy with anti-VEGF modalities, compared to laser photocoagulation, for the treatment of DMO.The objective of this updated review is to compare the effectiveness and safety of the different anti-VEGF drugs in preserving and improving vision and quality of life using network meta-analysis methods. SEARCH METHODS: We searched various electronic databases on 26 April 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared any anti-angiogenic drug with an anti-VEGF mechanism of action versus another anti-VEGF drug, another treatment, sham or no treatment in people with DMO. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods for pair-wise meta-analysis and we augmented this evidence using network meta-analysis methods. We focused on the relative efficacy and safety of the three most commonly used drugs as interventions of direct interest for practice: aflibercept and ranibizumab, used on-label; and off-label bevacizumab.We collected data on three efficacy outcomes (gain of 15 or more Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letters; mean change in best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA); mean change in central retinal thickness (CRT)), three safety outcomes (all severe systemic adverse events (SSAEs); all-cause death; arterial thromboembolic events) and quality of life.We used Stata 'network' meta-analysis package for all analyses. We investigated the risk of bias of mixed comparisons based on the variance contribution of each study, having assigned an overall risk of bias to each study. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-four studies included 6007 participants with DMO and moderate vision loss, of which two studies randomised 265 eyes of 230 participants and one was a cross-over study on 56 participants (62 eyes) that was treated as a parallel-arm trial. Data were collected on drugs of direct interest from three studies on aflibercept (975 eyes), eight studies on bevacizumab (515 eyes), and 14 studies on ranibizumab (1518 eyes). As treatments of indirect interest or legacy treatment we included three studies on pegaptanib (541 eyes), five studies on ranibizumab plus prompt laser (557 eyes), one study on ranibizumab plus deferred laser (188 eyes), 13 studies on laser photocoagulation (936 eyes) and six studies on sham treatment (793 eyes).Aflibercept, bevacizumab and ranibizumab were all more effective than laser for improving vision by 3 or more lines after one year (high-certainty evidence). Approximately one in 10 people improve vision with laser, and about three in 10 people improve with anti-VEGF treatment: risk ratio (RR) versus laser 3.66 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.79 to 4.79) for aflibercept; RR 2.47 (95% CI 1.81 to 3.37) for bevacizumab; RR 2.76 (95% CI 2.12 to 3.59) for ranibizumab. On average there was no change in visual acuity (VA) with laser after one year, compared with a gain of 1 or 2 lines with anti-VEGF treatment: laser versus aflibercept mean difference (MD) -0.20 (95% CI -0.22 to -0.17) logMAR; versus bevacizumab MD -0.12 (95% CI -0.15 to -0.09) logMAR; versus ranibizumab MD -0.12 (95% CI -0.14 to -0.10) logMAR. The certainty of the evidence was high for the comparison of aflibercept and ranibizumab with laser and moderate for bevacizumab comparison with laser due to inconsistency between the indirect and direct evidence.People receiving ranibizumab were less likely to gain 3 or more lines of VA at one year compared with aflibercept: RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.94), moderate-certainty evidence. For every 1000 people treated with aflibercept, 92 fewer would gain 3 or more lines of VA at one year if treated with ranibizumab (22 to 148 fewer). On average people receiving ranibizumab had worse VA at one year (MD 0.08 logMAR units, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.11), moderate-certainty evidence; and higher CRT (MD 39 µm, 95% CI 2 µm to 76 µm; low-certainty evidence). Ranibizumab and bevacizumab were comparable with respect to aflibercept and did not differ in terms of VA: RR of gain of 3 or more lines of VA at one year 1.11 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.43), moderate-certainty evidence, and difference in change in VA was 0.00 (95% CI -0.02 to 0.03) logMAR, moderate-certainty evidence. CRT reduction favoured ranibizumab by -29 µm (95% CI -58 µm to -1 µm, low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of overall statistical inconsistency in our analyses.The previous version of this review found moderate-certainty evidence of good safety of antiangiogenic drugs versus control. This update used data at the longest available follow-up (one or two years) and found that aflibercept, ranibizumab and bevacizumab do not differ regarding systemic serious adverse events (SSAEs) (moderate- or high-certainty evidence). However, risk of bias was variable, loop inconsistency could be found and estimates were not precise enough on relative safety regarding less frequent events such as arterial thromboembolic events or death (low- or very low-certainty evidence).Two-year data were available and reported in only four RCTs in this review. Most industry-sponsored studies were open-label after one year. One large publicly-funded study compared the three drugs at two years and found no difference. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Anti-VEGF drugs are effective at improving vision in people with DMO with three to four in every 10 people likely to experience an improvement of 3 or more lines VA at one year. There is moderate-certainty evidence that aflibercept confers some advantage over ranibizumab and bevacizumab in people with DMO at one year in visual and anatomic terms. Relative effects among anti-VEGF drugs at two years are less well known, since most studies were short term. Evidence from RCTs may not apply to real-world practice, where people in need of antiangiogenic treatment are often under-treated and under-monitored.We found no signals of differences in overall safety between the three antiangiogenic drugs that are currently available to treat DMO, but our estimates are imprecise for cardiovascular events and death.

Portable devices for diagnosis and monitoring of glaucoma: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Glaucoma is the leading cause of irreversible blindness in the world. The need to diagnose glaucoma early in its natural history before extensive sight loss occurs cannot be overemphasised. However, glaucoma is largely asymptomatic in the early stages of the disease making it complex to diagnose clinically and requires the support of technology. The objective of this scoping review is to determine the nature and extent of the evidence for use of portable devices in the diagnosis of glaucoma. METHODS: We will consider studies conducted in all healthcare settings using portable devices for the detection of all type of adult glaucoma. We will also include any systematic reviews or scoping reviews, which relate to this topic. Searches will be conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL on the Cochrane Library and Global Health databases, from their inception to the present. Reference lists from publications identified in the searches will also be reviewed. Two authors will independently screen titles and abstracts, followed by full-text screening to assess studies for inclusion. Any disagreements will be discussed and resolved with a third author. Tables accompanied by narrative descriptions will be employed to discuss results and show how it relates to review questions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required in this review. Only published and publicly accessible data will be used. We will publish our findings in an open-access, peer-reviewed journal and develop an accessible summary of results and recommendations.

What is the coverage of retina screening services for people with diabetes? Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetic retinopathy is a leading cause of vision impairment globally. Vision loss from diabetic retinopathy can generally be prevented by early detection and timely treatment. The WHO included a measure of service access for diabetic retinopathy as a core indicator in the Eye Care Indicator Menu launched in 2022: retina screening coverage for people with diabetes. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive global and regional summary of the available information on retina screening coverage for people with diabetes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A search will be conducted in five databases without language restrictions for studies from any country reporting retina screening coverage for adults with any type of diabetes at the national or subnational level using data collected since 1 January 2000 until the search date. We will also seek reports and coverage statistics from government websites of all WHO member states. Two investigators will independently screen studies, extract relevant data and assess risk of bias of included studies. The results of the review will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guideline. We will summarise the range of coverage definitions reported across included studies and present the median retina screening coverage in WHO regions and by World Bank country income level. Depending on the availability of data, we will conduct meta-analysis to assess disparities in retina screening coverage for people with diabetes by factors in the PROGRESS framework (Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status and Social capital). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review will only include published data thus no ethical approval will be sought. The findings of this review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: OSF registration 17/10/2023: https://osf.io/k5p69.

Sport expertise and physical exercise are associated with "hot" executive functioning: An electrophysiological examination of reward processing in collegiate athletes.

OBJECTIVE: Prior research has revealed potential effects of sports expertise and physical exercise on cognition, though there is limited research examining their effects on the "hot," emotional-processing aspects of executive functioning (e.g., valence and reward processing important for decision-making). The present study aimed to address this gap by examining event-related brain potentials (ERPs) during a reward-processing task in athletes versus non-athletes, while also investigating if sport expertise and exercise influence this electrophysiological response. METHOD: A total of 45 participants, including 22 athletes (55% women, 45% men) and 23 non-athlete controls (57% women, 43% men) between the ages of 18-27, completed a "virtual T-maze" environment task involving a rewarded forced choice that elicits the reward positivity (Rew-P), an ERP component associated with reward processing. Rew-P peak amplitude was compared between groups, and both sport expertise and frequency of strenuous exercise were investigated as potential predictors of the Rew-P in athletes. RESULTS: No significant Rew-P differences were found between athletes and controls (t = -1.43, p = .16, d = -.43). However, frequency of strenuous exercise (ß = -.51, p = .01) and sport expertise (ß = -.48, p = .01) each accounted for a significant proportion of variability in the Rew-P peak amplitude in athletes. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that, for young adults, sport expertise and physical exercise may each account for heightened electrophysiological reward sensitivity in athletes. Potential implications are discussed for decision-making, an integral cognitive process in sports that is driven by reward processing, and the role of reward-seeking and motivation in sport proficiency.

A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Age-related Macular Degeneration.

BACKGROUND: In response to the recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO) World report on vision, the WHO is developing a Package of Eye Care Interventions (PECI) to support the integration of eye care into health systems within countries. This study was done to systematically review clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) related to age-related macular degeneration (AMD) to provide evidence-based recommendations. METHODS: All AMD-related CPGs published between 2010 and 2020 were reviewed and evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool. RESULTS: Of 3778 CPGs identified, 48 underwent full-text screening and eight underwent quality appraisal. Five National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE, UK) guidelines for AMD were finally selected for data extraction. Intravitreal anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) treatment was strongly recommended for advanced, active neovascular AMD based on high-quality evidence. Photodynamic therapy and laser photocoagulation were not recommended as an adjunct to anti-VEGF therapy as first-line treatment for AMD. Recommendations on other interventions, including epiretinal brachytherapy, miniature lens system implantation, and limited macular translocation, were weak and evidence mostly came from low-quality case series studies. Hence these interventions were recommended to be used only with special arrangements or research. Existing evidence on treating geographic atrophy was limited, an implantable miniature telescope might be an effective intervention to improve vision but was still under investigation. DISCUSSION: Current CPGs recommend anti-VEGF therapy for patients with late active neovascular AMD, while other interventions should be used with caution and further researches are warranted.

Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for uveitis.

To facilitate the integration of eye care into universal health coverage, the WHO is developing a Package of Eye Care Interventions (PECI). Development of the PECI involves the identification of evidence-based interventions from relevant clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for uveitis.A systematic review of CPGs published on uveitis between 2010 and March 2020 was conducted. CPGs passing title and abstract and full-text screening were evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool and data on recommended interventions extracted using a standard data extraction sheet.Of 56 CPGs identified as potentially relevant from the systematic literature search, 3 CPGs underwent data extraction following the screening stages and appraisal with the AGREE II tool. These CPGs covered screening for, monitoring and treating juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA)-associated uveitis, the use of adalimumab and dexamethasone in treating non-infectious uveitis, and a top-level summary of assessment, differential diagnosis and referral recommendations for uveitis, aimed at primary care practitioners. Many of the recommendations were based on expert opinion, though some incorporated clinical study and randomised controlled trial data.There is currently sparse coverage of the spectrum of disease caused by uveitis within CPGs. This may partially be due to the large number of conditions with diverse causes and clinical presentations covered by the umbrella term uveitis, which makes numerous sets of guidelines necessary. The limited pool of CPGs to select from has implications for clinicians seeking guidance on clinical care strategies for uveitis.

Antimicrobial resistance in topical treatments for microbial keratitis: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: There is evidence for increased resistance against the antimicrobials used to treat keratitis. This review aims to provide global and regional prevalence estimates of antimicrobial resistance in corneal isolates and the range of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) with their associated resistance breakpoints. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We report this protocol following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. We will conduct an electronic bibliographic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Eligible studies will report in any language data for the resistance or MIC for antimicrobials against bacterial, fungal or amoebic organisms isolated from suspected microbial keratitis. Studies that only report on viral keratitis will not be included. There will be no time restrictions on the date of publication. Screening for eligible studies, assessment of risk of bias and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers independently, using predefined inclusion criteria and prepiloted data extraction forms. We will resolve disagreements between the reviewers by discussion and, if required, a third (senior) reviewer will arbitrate. We will assess the risk of bias using a tool validated in prevalence studies. The certainty of the evidence will be assessed using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Pooled proportion estimates will be calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the I2 statistic. We will explore differences between Global Burden of Disease regions and temporal trends. ETHICS APPROVAL AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required as this is a protocol for a systematic review of published data. The findings of this review will be published in an open-access, peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023331126.

Primary eye health services for older adults as a component of universal health coverage: a scoping review of evidence from high income countries.

In pursuit of Universal Health Coverage (UHC) for eye health, countries must strengthen services for older adults, who experience the highest prevalence of eye conditions. This scoping review narratively summarised (i) primary eye health services for older adults in eleven high-income countries/territories (from government websites), and (ii) the evidence that eye health services reduced vision impairment and/or provided UHC (access, quality, equity, or financial protection) (from a systematic literature search). We identified 76 services, commonly comprehensive eye examinations ± refractive error correction. Of 102 included publications reporting UHC outcomes, there was no evidence to support vision screening in the absence of follow-up care. Included studies tended to report the UHC dimensions of access (n=70), equity (n=47), and/or quality (n=39), and rarely reported financial protection (n=5). Insufficient access for population subgroups was common; several examples of horizontal and vertical integration of eye health services within the health system were described. Funding: This work was funded by Blind Low Vision New Zealand for Eye Health Aotearoa.

Artificial intelligence for diabetic retinopathy in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of blindness globally. There is growing evidence to support the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in diabetic eye care, particularly for screening populations at risk of sight loss from DR in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) where resources are most stretched. However, implementation into clinical practice remains limited. We conducted a scoping review to identify what AI tools have been used for DR in LMICs and to report their performance and relevant characteristics. 81 articles were included. The reported sensitivities and specificities were generally high providing evidence to support use in clinical practice. However, the majority of studies focused on sensitivity and specificity only and there was limited information on cost, regulatory approvals and whether the use of AI improved health outcomes. Further research that goes beyond reporting sensitivities and specificities is needed prior to wider implementation.

Rapid methods for identifying barriers and solutions to improve access to community health services: a scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVES: Low attendance rates for community health services reflect important barriers that prevent people from receiving the care they need. Services and health systems that seek to advance Universal Health Coverage need to understand and act on these factors. Formal qualitative research is the best way to elicit barriers and identify potential solutions, however traditional approaches take months to complete and can be very expensive. We aim to map the methods that have been used to rapidly elicit barriers to accessing community health services and identify potential solutions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library and Global Health for empirical studies that use rapid methods (<14 days) to elicit barriers and potential solutions from intended service beneficiaries. We will exclude hospital-based and 100% remotely delivered services. We will include studies conducted in any country from 1978 to present. We will not limit by language. Two reviewers will independently perform screening and data extraction, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. We will tabulate the different approaches used and present data on time, skills and financial requirements for each approach, as well as the governance framework and any strengths and weaknesses presented by the study authors. We will follow Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) scoping review guidance and report the review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required. We will share our findings in the peer-reviewed literature, at conferences, and with WHO policymakers working in this space. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/a6r2m).

Rapid methods for identifying barriers and solutions to improve access to community health services: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The advancement of universal health coverage (UHC) is largely based on identifying and addressing barriers to accessing community health services. Traditional qualitative research approaches provide excellent insights but have unfeasibly high resource requirements for most care providers. AIM: To identify, categorise, and evaluate methods that have been used to identify barriers to and/or solutions for improving access to community-based health services, grounded in engagement with affected communities, excluding approaches that take >14 days. DESIGN & SETTING: This was a scoping review. METHOD: Following Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines, a search was undertaken using the Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Global Health, and Google Scholar. An information specialist designed the search, and dual independent review and data charting were used. RESULTS: In total, 44 studies were included from 30 countries, reporting on 18 different clinical services. Thirty studies used self-described 'rapid' approaches; however, the majority of these did not justify what they meant by this term. Nearly half of the studies used mixed- or multi-methods and triangulation to verify early findings. All of the qualitative studies used interviews and/or focus groups, which were often supplemented with observations, document review, and mapping activities. The use of in situ snowball and convenience sampling; community members as data collectors and cultural guides; collaborative summarisation (review of findings with community members and end-users); and deductive framework analysis expedited the research processes. There were no data on costs. CONCLUSION: There are a wide range of methods that can be used to deliver timely information about barriers to access. The methods employed in the articles reviewed tended to use traditional data collection approaches in innovative ways.

Associations between vision impairment and vision-related interventions on crash risk and driving cessation: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically investigate the associations between vision impairment and risk of motor vehicle crash (MVC) involvement, and evaluate vision-related interventions to reduce MVCs. DESIGN: Medline (Ovid), EMBASE and Global Health electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to March 2022 for observational and interventional English-language studies. Screening, data extraction and appraisals using the Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tools were completed by two reviewers independently. Where appropriate, measures of association were converted into risk ratios (RRs) or ORs for meta-analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Drivers of four-wheeled vehicles of all ages with no cognitive declines. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: MVC involvement (primary) and driving cessation (secondary). RESULTS: 101 studies (n=778 052) were included after full-text review. 57 studies only involved older drivers (≥65 years) and 85 were in high-income settings. Heterogeneity in the data meant that most meta-analyses were underpowered as only 25 studies, further split into different groups of eye diseases and measures of vision, could be meta-analysed. The limited evidence from the meta-analyses suggests that visual field defects (four studies; RR 1.51 (95% CI 1.23, 1.85); p<0.001; I2=46.79%), and contrast sensitivity (two studies; RR 1.40 (95% CI 1.08, 1.80); p=0.01, I2=0.11%) and visual acuity loss (five studies; RR 1.21 (95% CI 1.02, 1.43); p=0.03, I2=28.49%) may increase crash risk. The results are more inconclusive for available evidence for associations of glaucoma (five studies, RR 1.27 (95% CI 0.67, 2.42); p=0.47; I2=93.48%) and cataract (two studies RR 1.15 (95% CI 0.97, 1.36); p=0.11; I2=3.96%) with crashes. Driving cessation may also be linked with glaucoma (two studies; RR 1.62 (95% CI 1.20, 2.19); p<0.001, I2=22.45%), age-related macular degeneration (AMD) (three studies; RR 2.21 (95% CI 1.47, 3.31); p<0.001, I2=75.11%) and reduced contrast sensitivity (three studies; RR 1.30 (95% CI 1.05, 1.61); p=0.02; I2=63.19%). Cataract surgery halved MVC risk (three studies; RR 0.55 (95% CI 0.34, 0.92); p=0.02; I2=97.10). Ranibizumab injections (four randomised controlled trials) prolonged driving in persons with AMD. CONCLUSION: Impaired vision identified through a variety of measures is associated with both increased MVC involvement and cessation. Cataract surgery can reduce MVC risk. Despite literature being highly heterogeneous, this review shows that detection of vision problems and appropriate treatment are critical to road safety. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020172153.

Prevalence and impact of combined vision and hearing (dual sensory) impairment: A scoping review.

Hearing and vision impairments are common globally. They are often considered separately in research, and in planning and delivering services. However, they can occur concurrently, termed dual sensory impairment (DSI). The prevalence and impact of hearing and vision impairment have been well-examined, but there has been much less consideration of DSI. The aim of this scoping review was to determine the nature and extent of the evidence on prevalence and impact of DSI. Three databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase and Global Health (April 2022). We included primary studies and systematic reviews reporting the prevalence or impact of DSI. No limits were placed on age, publication dates, or country. Only studies where the full text was available in English were included. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstract, full texts. Data were charted by two reviewers independently using a pre-piloted form. The review identified 183 reports of 153 unique primary studies and 14 review articles. Most evidence came from high-income countries (86% of reports). Prevalence varied across reports, as did age groups of participants and definitions used. The prevalence of DSI increased with age. Impact was examined across three broad groups of outcomes-psychosocial, participation, and physical health. There was a strong trend towards poorer outcomes for people with DSI across all categories compared to people with one or neither impairment, including activities of daily living (worse for people with DSI in 78% of reports) and depression (68%). This scoping review highlights that DSI is a relatively common condition with substantial impact, particularly among older adults. There is a gap in evidence from low and middle-income countries. There is a pressing need for a consensus position on the definition(s) of DSI and standardisation of reporting age groups to enable reliable estimates to be ascertained and compared and responsive services developed.

Electrophysiological variability during tests of executive functioning: A comparison of athletes with and without concussion and sedentary control participants.

OBJECTIVE: Sport participation may benefit executive functioning (EF), but EF can also be adversely affected by concussion, which can occur during sport participation. Neural variability is an emerging proxy of brain health that indexes the brain's range of possible responses to incoming stimuli (i.e., dynamic range) and interconnectedness, but has yet to be characterized following concussion among athletes. This study examined whether neural variability was enhanced by athletic participation and attenuated by concussion. METHOD: Seventy-seven participants (18-25 years-old) were classified as sedentary controls (n = 33), athletes with positive concussion history (n = 21), or athletes without concussion (n = 23). Participants completed tests of attention switching, response inhibition, and updating working memory while undergoing electroencephalography recordings to index neural variability. RESULTS: Compared to sedentary controls and athletes without concussion, athletes with concussion exhibited a restricted whole-brain dynamic range of neural variability when completing a test of inhibitory control. There were no group differences observed for either the switching or working memory tasks. CONCLUSIONS: A history of concussion was related to reduced dynamic range of neural activity during a task of response inhibition in young adult athletes. Neural variability may have value for evaluating brain health following concussion.

A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines for childhood glaucoma.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review to identify and critically appraise clinical practice guidelines on the assessment, diagnosis and management of childhood glaucoma. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic literature search of databases and professional websites for clinical practice guidelines published on eye conditions between 2010 and April 2020 in English was conducted. Identified guidelines were screened for relevance to childhood glaucoma and exclusion criteria applied. Guidelines that passed the screening and quality appraisal with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool and, if they achieved a mean score of ≥45 and ≥3 on subsets of 9 and 5 AGREE II items, respectively, were selected for inclusion and data extracted using a standardised form. RESULTS: Following screening and critical appraisal, three guidelines were included for data extraction. None of the three guidelines was specifically developed for childhood glaucoma. A consistent recommendation was that children should undergo some form of eye screening examination or a comprehensive eye assessment to detect paediatric eye disease. Children at high risk of childhood glaucoma should undergo additional screening. One clinical practice guideline recommended interventions for childhood glaucoma consisting of tube surgery and topical beta-blockers or carbonic anhydrase inhibitors. Recommended interventions for childhood glaucoma were based on low-quality to moderate-quality evidence or expert opinion. CONCLUSION: Based on our selection criteria, we did not identify any high-quality clinical practice guidelines specifically targeted at childhood glaucoma. This is compounded by the lack of high-quality evidence on childhood glaucoma.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Detection and Treatment of Amblyopia: A Systematic Literature Review.

PURPOSE: The World Health Organization's Package of Eye Care Interventions (PECI) aims to support incorporation of amblyopia detection and treatment into health service provision. The aim of this study was to systematically review clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for amblyopia to inform the development of this package. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Global Index Medicus databases, guideline databases and professional body websites were searched for CPGs published in English between 2010 and 9th March 2020. Guidelines were assessed using the AGREE II tool. RESULTS: Five CPGs from North America published between 2017-2019 were identified. One CPG provided recommendations on amblyopia treatment and four focused on amblyopia detection and assessment. Non-specialist screening for amblyopic risk factors was recommended in children aged 3-5 years. At least one comprehensive eye examination was recommended for infants and children aged 0-5 years. Treatment recommendations consisted of refractive correction followed by occlusion or cycloplegic penalization. CONCLUSIONS: Additional evidence is required to compare the benefits and limitations of comprehensive eye examinations for asymptomatic children to those from screening programs. Identified CPGs were produced in high-resource countries and may not be readily applied in lower resource settings where the PECI has the greatest potential to improve service provision.

Universal newborn eye screening: a systematic review of the literature and review of international guidelines.

Background: This systematic review assessed the effectiveness of universal screening for newborn eye abnormalities compared with no screening in improving infant vision and health outcomes. Methods: We searched CENTRAL (Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, Global Index Medicus, clinical trials databases, and bibliographies of relevant articles. We included randomized and observational studies of all newborns, regardless of illness or risk factors, that compared universal screening for any eye abnormality by eight weeks of age with no universal screening. Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. We also reviewed available recommendations on newborn eye screening. Results: Fourteen studies were identified but only three compared universal red reflex screening with no screening. Findings suggest that universal red reflex testing in maternity wards (MWs) may increase the number of newborns with congenital cataracts referred for eye care from MWs or well-baby clinics (WBCs) in the first year of life (risk ratio (RR) = 9.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.36-71.20; low certainty evidence). However, the effect of screening in WBC is uncertain (RR = 6.62, 95% CI = 0.87-50.09). The effect of MW or WBC screening on referral from any health care facility (MWs, WBCs, paediatrician clinic, other) in the first year is uncertain (MW screening: RR = 1.22, 95% CI = 0.63-2.39; WBC screening: RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.46-2.05). However, referral or surgery by 6 weeks of age may be higher with universal MW screening (early referral: RR = 4.61, 95% CI = 1.12-19.01; early surgery: RR = 8.23, 95% CI = 1.13-59.80; low certainty evidence). The effect of WBC screening on early referral and surgery is uncertain (early referral: RR = 1.98, 95% CI = 0.43-9.19; early surgery: RR = 3.97, 95% CI = 0.50-31.33; very low certainty evidence). Universal red reflex testing may increase clinical conjunctivitis (OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.01-1.47; low certainty evidence) but the effect on confirmed bacterial conjunctivitis is uncertain (OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 0.76-1.90; very low-certainty evidence). Nine guidelines recommended universal newborn eye screening using red reflex testing. Conclusions: Evidence supports the role of red reflex testing shortly after birth to increase early identification, referral, and surgery for congenital cataracts.