Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study was intended to evaluate the psychosocial impacts of ocular and facial ailments on women and to evaluate the efficiency of various interventions on psychological well-being and quality of life. The researcher conducted the study while adhering to the advocated reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A total of 24 peer-reviewed articles from reputable databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus) and published starting January 1, 1990 to 2023 were included. Forest plots were used for data visualization, and fixed- and random-effects models were adopted for meta-analysis. There was observed significant improvement in self-esteem following intervention implementation (pooled effect size of 0.73, p < 0.001), body image (pooled effect size of 0.65, p < 0.001), reduction in anxiety levels post-intervention (pooled effect size of −0.56, p < 0.001), reduction in depression levels (pooled effect size of −0.48, p < 0.001), as well as improvement in overall quality of life (pooled effect size of 0.56, p < 0.001). Where relevant, odds ratios were noted from included studies but not the primary measure for the pooled effects. This study highlights the intricate interplay of individual, interpersonal, and environmental factors in shaping psychosocial outcomes and underscores the need for comprehensive care that addresses the multidimensional needs of affected women.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dange et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: