Systematic review 1

The systematic review aimed to identify the magnitude of risk of OAG attributable to age, ethnicity, family history, myopia and diabetes. Population-based cohort and cross-sectional studies, investigating the risk of developing OAG were included, as well as meta-analyses and systematic reviews of observational population-based studies. Studies reporting populations in UK, Europe, North America, Canada or Australia were included. Hospital or clinic-based setting were excluded. The review was restricted to English language publications. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed.

4383 reports were identified from the search for studies on epidemiology, risk and disease progression, of which 285 were selected for full assessment for this review. 92 reports describing 27 studies met the inclusion criteria for the review.

The overall quality of each study was summarised as (A) no major flaws or (B) possible important flaws. Studies were included when they rated ‘A' in all fields. Exceptions were made to include ‘B' studies when no better evidence was available. In most studies (81%), participants were sampled adequately and selected from a relevant population. Suboptimal approaches to diagnose OAG (e.g. high IOP, absence of a visual test, unstandardised criteria) were used in five studies (19%). IOP, diabetes and myopia status were obtained from a secure record (examination or examination records) in most studies. However, only one (20%) obtained family history status from a secure source, by examination of first degree relatives of detected cases

Crude and adjusted relative risks (or odds ratios depending on study design) of OAG for the risk factors under investigation were abstracted. Where two or more studies contributed data, a random effects meta-analysis was undertaken. If both an unadjusted and adjusted ratio were reported in a study, an age- and gender-adjusted odds ratio was used in the meta-analysis. A relative risk was generated when an adjusted odds ratio was not reported and raw data were available.

All studies consistently showed that the prevalence of OAG increases with older age «Burr JM, Mowatt G, Hernández R ym. The clinical ef...»1.

Systematic review 2

Structured Medline (January 1950 – January 2013) search and a hand search of references and citations of retrieved articles yielding 57 articles from 41 studies were included in the systematic review.

The summary prevalence of glaucoma in the highest-quality studies was 2.6% (95% CI, 2.1%-3.1%). Among risk factors evaluated: increasing age increased the risk (especially age >80 years; OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.9-4.3) «Hollands H, Johnson D, Hollands S ym. Do findings ...»2.

Systematic review 3

The objective of the analysis of this systematic review was to determine the strength of association between age, gender, ethnicity, family history of disease and refractive error and the risk of developing glaucoma. The medical advisory secretariat conducted a computerized search of literature in English-language articles, published from January 2000 to March 2006. In addition, a search was conducted for published guidelines, health technology assessments, and policy decisions. Bibliographies of references of relevant papers were searched for additional references.

Studies including participants ≥ 20 years old, population-based prospective cohort studies, population-based cross-sectional studies when prospective cohort studies were unavailable or insufficient and studies determining and reporting the strength of association or risk- specific prevalence or incidence rates were included in the review. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to summarize the overall quality of the body of evidence.

A total of 498 citations for the period January 2000 through February 2006 were retrieved and an additional 313 were identified when the search was expanded to include articles published between 1990 and 1999. An additional 6 articles were obtained from bibliographies of relevant articles. Of these, 36 articles were retrieved for further evaluation. Upon review, 1 meta-analysis and 15 population-based epidemiological studies were accepted for this review

Six cross-sectional studies and 1 prospective cohort study contributed data on the association between age and PAOG. From the data it can be concluded that the prevalence and 4-year incidence of POAG increases with increasing age. The odds of having POAG are statistically significantly greater for people 50 years of age and older relative to those 40 to 49 years of age. There is an estimated 7% per year incremental odds of having POAG in persons 40 years of age and older, and 10% per year in persons 49 years of age and older «Medical Advisory Secretariat.. Routine eye examina...»3.