Evidence Hub

Epidemiological characterization of uveitis in the elderly population: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Liba T, Levanon E, Gorenshtein A, Megreli J, Ben-David G, Gothelf I, Bar A, Ehrlich R

International ophthalmology, 2026

Abstract

Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to characterize etiological patterns of uveitis in individuals aged 60 years or older.

Methods: Following the PRISMA 2020 and MOOSE reporting guidelines, we searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, PubMed Central (PMC), and Web of Science (January 1, 2005-January 1, 2025). Data extraction focused on study characteristics, sample size, uveitis location, and reported causes. Random-effects models were used to pool proportions across studies, heterogeneity assessed by the I2 statistic. Methodological quality was evaluated via the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies and the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for cross-sectional studies.

Results: Out of 10,829 retrieved citations, 16 studies met the inclusion criteria. Idiopathic uveitis constituted the largest proportion, with a pooled proportion of 41.45% (95% CI 30.63-53.16%). Infectious etiologies included herpetic uveitis (pooled proportion 11.40%, 95% CI 7.45-17.04%), cytomegalovirus (3.09%, 95% CI 1.01-9.06%) and tuberculosis (5.10%, 95% CI 2.58-9.83%). Non-infectious causes, such as sarcoidosis (5.21%, 95% CI 2.78-9.55%) and HLA-B27-associated uveitis (6.05%, 95% CI 3.35-10.71%), also contributed substantially. High heterogeneity (I2 > 75%) was noted across most etiologies, likely reflecting variable study populations, diagnostic criteria, and geographic factors.

Conclusion: Our meta-analysis underscores the diverse etiological landscape of uveitis in the elderly, with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free