MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411023027 · doi:10.1111/aos.17533

Incidence and risk factors of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment following paediatric cataract surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2025· review· en· W4411023027 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hashem Abu Serhan, Saad Ashraf, Ayesha Shaukat, Ajeet Singh, Hasnaa Abdelrhem, Hamza Irfan, Fariha Arif, Abdullah Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Ophthalmologica · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraocular Surgery and Lenses
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQatar National Library
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)Meta-analysisRetinal detachmentOphthalmologyCataract surgeryMEDLINEWeb of scienceCochrane LibraryIntraocular lensCataract extractionSurgeryRetinalInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To determine the incidence and identify risk factors of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) following paediatric cataract surgery. This systematic review and meta‐analysis adhered to PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024538383). A comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases, including Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar, up to December 2024. Studies were included if they reported on RRD following cataract surgery in paediatric populations (0–18 years) with a minimum follow‐up of 4 months. Data extraction was performed independently by two authors, with disagreements resolved through consultation with a third author. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale, and statistical analysis was performed using R software version 4.5.0, with leave‐one‐out analysis conducted for outcomes with substantial heterogeneity ( I 2 > 50%). The meta‐analysis included data from 5922 eyes across nine studies. The mean age of the participants was 7.08 ± 3.13 years, with a mean follow‐up duration of 4.02 years. The pooled incidence of RRD after paediatric cataract surgery was 2.4% [95% CI: 0.7%; 5.0%], with significant heterogeneity observed ( I 2 = 85.8%). Patients without primary intraocular lens (IOL) implantation exhibited a numerically higher incidence of RRD (6.1% [95% CI: 0.6%; 15.9%]) compared to those with IOL implantation (1.9% [95% CI: 0.0%; 6.8%]); however, this difference was not found to be statistically significant ( p = 0.2667). Similarly, the incidence of RRD was 1.0% [95% CI: 0.3%; 2.2%] in unilaterally operated eyes and numerically higher at 2.1% [95% CI: 1.0%; 3.6%] in bilaterally operated eyes, though this difference was also not statistically significant ( p = 0.2563). Children with mental retardation demonstrated a significantly higher risk of RRD, with an incidence of 11.0% [95% CI: 6.6%; 16.4%]. Paediatric cataract surgery carries a notable risk of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment, with significant variability in incidence across different patient populations. While numerically higher incidences of RRD were observed in patients without primary IOL implantation and in bilaterally operated eyes compared to their counterparts, these differences did not reach statistical significance in this meta‐analysis. The presence of mental retardation was identified as a significant risk factor. Enhanced postoperative monitoring and individualised surgical approaches are recommended, particularly for high‐risk groups. Future research should focus on prospective studies with standardised protocols and longer follow‐up periods to better understand causal relationships and refine preventive strategies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.041
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa OphthalmologicaSame topicIntraocular Surgery and LensesFrench-language works237,207