It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Observational studies in glaucoma patients can provide important evidence on treatment effects, especially for combination therapies which are often used in reality. But the success relies on the reduction of selection bias through methods such as propensity score (PS) weighting. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of five glaucoma treatments (medication, laser, non-laser surgery (NLS), laser + medication, and NLS + medication) on 1-year intraocular pressure (IOP) change. Data were collected from 90 glaucoma subjects who underwent a single laser, or NLS intervention, and/or took the same medication for at least 6 months, and had IOP measures before the treatment and 12-months after. Baseline IOP was significantly different across groups (p = 0.007) and this unbalance was successfully corrected by the PS weighting (p = 0.81). All groups showed statistically significant PS-weighted IOP reductions, with the largest reduction in NLS group (−6.78 mmHg). Baseline IOP significantly interacted with treatments (p = 0.03), and at high baseline IOP medication was less effective than other treatments. Our findings showed that the 1-year IOP reduction differed across treatment groups and was dependent on baseline IOP. The use of PS-weighted methods reduced treatment selection bias at baseline and allowed valid assessment of the treatment effect in an observational study.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Department of Ophthalmology, New York University (NYU) School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA; Department of Population Health, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
2 Department of Population Health, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA; Department of Environmental Medicine, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
3 Department of Ophthalmology, New York University (NYU) School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA; Center of Neural Science, NYU, New York, NY, USA
4 Department of Population Health, NYU School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
5 Department of Ophthalmology, New York University (NYU) School of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA