SynthesisEye (London, England)2025
Association between metabolic syndrome and cataract: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Eye (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prediabetes and cataract risk in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2026Pooled it
- Multi-Targeted Intervention ofMetabolites · 2026Review
- Metabolic Syndrome Predisposes Ossabaw Minipig Retina to an Early Neurodegenerative Milieu.Cells · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMetabolic syndrome (MetS) has been suggested to be associated with an increased risk of cataract in adults. However, the evidence remains inconclusive. This meta-analysis aimed to clarify this potential association.
methodsWe conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science up to July 31, 2024, for observational studies evaluating the association between MetS and cataract. Data were pooled using a random-effects model to calculate risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed with the Cochrane Q test and I² statistics. Subgroup analyses were performed based on study characteristics.
resultsTen studies with 379,464 participants were included. The meta-analysis showed that MetS was significantly associated with an increased risk of cataract (RR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.16-1.41, p < 0.001; I² = 90%). Subgroup analyses indicated that the association was stronger in participants aged ≥57 years compared to those <57 years (p for subgroup difference <0.001) and in studies using the International Diabetes Federation criteria for MetS diagnosis compared to the National Cholesterol Education Program criteria (p for subgroup difference <0.001). No significant differences were found by geographic region, sex, or cataract types. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings. Egger's regression test showed no significant publication bias (p = 0.44).
conclusionMetS is associated with an increased risk of cataract in adults, particularly in older populations. Further studies are needed to explore the underlying mechanisms and develop prevention strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.