Pronalaženje dokaza o učinkovitosti i sigurnosti suplementacije antioksidativnim vitaminima u prevenciji i usporavanju progresije katarakte povezane sa starenjem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the available RCTs and systematic reviews regarding the efficacy and safety of antioxidant vitamin supplementation in preventing and slowing the progression of age-related cataract and to examine if we could find enough evidence for this. Materials and methods: The Cochrane systematic review “Antioxidant vitamin supplementation for preventing and slowing the progression of age-related cataract” was used as a base and according to its inclusion criteria we tried to find RCTs and systematic reviews published after it, yielding additional proof of the safety and efficacy of antioxidant vitamin supplementation regarding age-related cataracts. We searched PubMed, CENTRAL and DARE. After the search, we made a quality assessment of the systematic review using RAMSTAR. Results: The Cochrane systematic review involved nine trials, with 117,272 participants overall and an age range of ≥ 35 years. The trial follow-up ranged from 2.1 to 12 years and the trials were conducted in Italy, Finland, the United Kingdom, Australia, India and the United States. The antioxidant vitamins were dosed above the recommended daily allowance. No evidence was found supporting that antioxidant vitamin supplementation could reduce the risk of progression of cataract, cataract development, cataract extraction or that it could slow the loss of visual acuity. No evidence of effect of supplementation of beta-carotene in reducing the risk of cataract could be found in the pooled analysis (RR 0.99, 95%, CI 0.91-1.08; number of participants: 57,703) nor could be evidence found for a reduction of the risk of cataract extraction (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91-1.10; number of participants: 86,836). For the supplementation with vitamin E no risk reduction in cataract incidence could be found in the pooled analysis either (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91-1.04; number of participants: 50,059) or of cataract extraction (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91 - 1.05; number of participants: 83,956). 7.4 - 15.8% of patients on beta-carotene developed hypercarotenodermia (yellowing of skin). Only one additional RCT was found involving 11,267 exclusively male participants from the United States, Canada and Puerto Rico, with an age range of 50 years and older. Only part of this RCT was of interest for us, the part concerning supplementation with vitamin E. It lasted 5.6 years. Conclusion: Not enough evidence could be found to prove the safety and efficacy of supplementation with antioxidant vitamins for the slowing and the prevention of age-related cataract. Further research among non-well-nourished populations or well-nourished populations but regarding antioxidant blood levels rather than supplementation could be conducted in the future.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".