Table 1.

Populations, interventions, and outcomes of 49 reliable glaucoma intervention reviews

Review characteristic	Reviews n
Condition a
Open angle glaucoma (primary or secondary, pigmentary, pseudoexfoliative, normal tension)	22
Ocular hypertension	11
Acute angle closure attack	0
Primary angle closure glaucoma	6
Any type of glaucoma	10
Otherb	16
Intervention type c
Medical interventions	17
Laser interventions	10
Surgical interventions	14
Devices	5
Post operative (Surgical interventions)	2
Perioperative (Laser interventions)	1
Outcomes a
Intraocular pressure (IOP)	43
Visual function (e.g., reading small print, driving)	2
Visual field	19
Visual acuity	16
Treatment success or treatment failure	17
Need for reoperation	9
Treatment burden (e.g., reduction in number of drops)	18
Morphologic measures (e.g., optic disc damage, nerve fiber layer loss)	9
Safety (e.g., adverse events)	38
Quality of life (general or vision-related)	6
Cost, or cost-effectiveness	1
Otherd	10

^aReviews could examine multiple conditions and outcomes

^bExamples of “Other” types of glaucoma: refractory, non-refractory, neovascular, primary congenital, pseudoexfoliative, pigmentary

^cReviews were assigned a primary intervention type based on their designated interventions and comparators

^dExamples of “Other” outcomes: mean ocular perfusion pressure, pain control, electrophysiology, postoperative hypertensive phase, optic atrophy, adherence/persistence, patients’ knowledge of glaucoma, glaucoma/optic neuropathy progression, ocular problems (e.g., late hypotony, maculoathy, cataract, epitheliopathy, Tenon’s cyst, hyphaema, endophthalmitis)