Extraction form for project: Screening for Glaucoma in Adults - 1 of 2

Design Details

1. Study design

Arms

Arm NameArm Description
A. Timolol 0.25% twice daily for 1 month, followed by timolol 0.5% twice daily for 1 month, then continued on concentration with best response (n=70)
B. No treatment (n=73)

Sample Characteristics

1. N
A. Timolol 0.25% twice daily for 1 month, followed by timolol 0.5% twice daily for 1 month, then continued on concentration with best response (n=70)
B. No treatment (n=73)
Total
2. Baseline population
A. Timolol 0.25% twice daily for 1 month, followed by timolol 0.5% twice daily for 1 month, then continued on concentration with best response (n=70)
B. No treatment (n=73)
Total

Outcomes

TypeDomainSpecific measurement (i.e., tool/definition/specific outcome)PopulationsTimepoints
CategoricalVision disorderMean IOP during study
  • All Participants
  • end of study
CategoricalVision disorderGlaucomatous visual field defects
  • All Participants
  • end of study
CategoricalVision disorderGlaucomatous progression
  • All Participants
  • end of study

Risk of Bias Assessment

1. Random assignment
2. Allocation concealed
3. Groups similar at baseline
4. Eligibility criteria specified
5. Blinding: outcome assessors or data analysts
6. Intention-to-treat analysis
7. Reporting of attrition, contamination, etc.
8. Differential loss to followup or overall high loss to followup
9. Appropriate analysis including cluster correlation
10. Funding source
11. Randomization adequate?
12. Allocation concealment adequate?
13. Groups similar at baseline?
14. Eligibility criteria specified?
15. Outcome assessors masked?
16. Care provider masked?
17. Patient masked?
18. Attrition and withdrawals reported?
19. Loss to followup differential/ high?
20. People analyzed in the groups in which they were randomized?
21. Quality

Results

Categorical


Vision disorder (Mean IOP during study)

All Participants
Descriptive StatisticsBetween Arm Comparisons
A. Timolol 0.25% twice daily for 1 month, followed by timolol 0.5% twice daily for 1 month, then continued on concentration with best response (n=70)B. No treatment (n=73)
vs.
end of study
Mean IOP
Risk Ratio (RR)
Percentage
95% CI low (RR)
95% CI high (RR)
p value
Within Arm ComparisonsNet Comparisons
A. Timolol 0.25% twice daily for 1 month, followed by timolol 0.5% twice daily for 1 month, then continued on concentration with best response (n=70)B. No treatment (n=73)
vs.

Vision disorder (Glaucomatous visual field defects)

All Participants
Descriptive StatisticsBetween Arm Comparisons
A. Timolol 0.25% twice daily for 1 month, followed by timolol 0.5% twice daily for 1 month, then continued on concentration with best response (n=70)B. No treatment (n=73)
end of study
Mean IOP
Odds Ratio (OR)
Percentage
95% CI low (OR)
95% CI high (OR)
Risk Ratio (RR)
95% CI low (RR)
95% CI high (RR)
p value
Within Arm ComparisonsNet Comparisons
A. Timolol 0.25% twice daily for 1 month, followed by timolol 0.5% twice daily for 1 month, then continued on concentration with best response (n=70)B. No treatment (n=73)

Vision disorder (Glaucomatous progression)

All Participants
Descriptive StatisticsBetween Arm Comparisons
A. Timolol 0.25% twice daily for 1 month, followed by timolol 0.5% twice daily for 1 month, then continued on concentration with best response (n=70)B. No treatment (n=73)
All Arms (ANOVA)
end of study
Mean IOP
Risk Ratio (RR)
Percentage
95% CI low (RR)
95% CI high (RR)
Within Arm ComparisonsNet Comparisons
A. Timolol 0.25% twice daily for 1 month, followed by timolol 0.5% twice daily for 1 month, then continued on concentration with best response (n=70)B. No treatment (n=73)
All Arms (ANOVA)