↓ Skip to main content

mTOR-inhibiting pharmacotherapy for the treatment of non-infectious uveitis: a systematic review protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
mTOR-inhibiting pharmacotherapy for the treatment of non-infectious uveitis: a systematic review protocol
Published in
Systematic Reviews, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13643-018-0745-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joshua Blair, Robert Barry, Philip I. Murray, David J. Moore, Alastair K. Denniston

Abstract

Non-infectious uveitis represents a sub-type of intraocular inflammation often associated with disorders of immune dysregulation. If untreated, the intraocular inflammation may progress to severe visual impairment and blindness. Current treatment is heavily reliant on systemic corticosteroid, often at doses associated with severe side effects. There is a need for efficacious corticosteroid-sparing immunomodulatory therapy for these patients. Current immunomodulators include various immunosuppressants and biologics but mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors (such as sirolimus and everolimus) may also be contenders for this role. The systematic review proposed here will evaluate the evidence for the use of sirolimus and everolimus in the context of non-infectious uveitis. Standard systematic review methodology will be used to identify, select and extract data from any comparative or non-comparative study of mTOR inhibitors in patients with non-infectious uveitis excluding case reports. Searches of bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and CINAHL) and clinical trials registers will be performed, with no restriction on language or date of publication. Translation of non-English language articles will be undertaken where necessary. The primary outcome of interest will be uveitis activity as measured by vitreous haze. Secondary outcomes will include other pre-specified measures of uveitis activity (such as anterior chamber cells or central macular thickness) best corrected visual acuity, heath-related quality of life, requirement for concurrent treatment and adverse events. Risk of bias assessment will be performed appropriate to each study design. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment will be undertaken by two reviewers independently. Data will be grouped, tabulated and narratively synthesised. Meta-analysis will be undertaken where appropriate clinical and methodological homogeneity exists. The review will be published according to PRISMA guidance. Studies of various designs have investigated the clinical use of mTOR inhibitors for non-infectious uveitis, and a large international randomised controlled trail of sirolimus for non-infectious uveitis is due to report. The findings of this systematic review will help inform ophthalmologists and aid the improvement of treatment protocols for non-infectious uveitis with regard to the use of mTOR inhibitors. PROSPERO CRD42017056390.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 9 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 47%
Sports and Recreations 2 7%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 9 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 June 2018.
All research outputs
#5,829,019
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#994
of 2,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,662
of 328,920 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#28
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,009 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,920 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.