ArticleJournal of optometry
Atomic force microscopy and Langmuir-Blodgett monolayer technique to assess contact lens deposits and human meibum extracts.
Article in Journal of optometry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nanoscale Characteristics of Ocular Lipid Thin Films Using Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy.Translational vision science & technology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this exploratory study was to investigate the differences in meibomian gland secretions, contact lens (CL) lipid extracts, and CL surface topography between participants with and without meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD).
methodsMeibum study: Meibum was collected from all participants and studied via Langmuir-Blodgett (LB) deposition with subsequent Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) visualization and surface roughness analysis. CL Study: Participants with and without MGD wore both etafilcon A and balafilcon A CLs in two different phases. CL lipid deposits were extracted and analyzed using pressure-area isotherms with the LB trough and CL surface topographies and roughness values were visualized using AFM.
resultsMeibum study: Non-MGD participant meibum samples showed larger, circular aggregates with lower surface roughness, whereas meibum samples from participants with MGD showed more lipid aggregates, greater size variability and higher surface roughness. CL Study: Worn CLs from participants with MGD had a few large tear film deposits with lower surface roughness, whereas non-MGD participant-worn lenses had many small lens deposits with higher surface roughness. Balafilcon A pore depths were shallower in MGD participant worn lenses when compared to non-MGD participant lenses. Isotherms of CL lipid extracts from MGD and non-MGD participants showed a seamless rise in surface pressure as area decreased; however, extracts from the two different lens materials produced different isotherms.
conclusionsMGD and non-MGD participant-worn CL deposition were found to differ in type, amount, and pattern of lens deposits. Lipids from MGD participants deposited irregularly whereas lipids from non-MGD participants showed more uniformity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.