ArticleBMC ophthalmology2020
Clinical characteristics of dry eye with ocular neuropathic pain features: comparison according to the types of sensitization based on the Ocular Pain Assessment Survey.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neuropathic Corneal Pain and Blepharospasm: A Case Series.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Randomized Double-Masked Study Evaluating Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Topical Cooling Device for Chronic Ocular Surface Pain.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2026Article
- Validation of the Ocular Pain Assessment Survey Instrument With Rasch Analysis.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Ocular pain assessment survey (OPAS-J).Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Electroacupuncture Alleviates Dry Eye Ocular Pain Through TNF-ɑ Mediated ERK1/2/P2XJournal of pain research · 2023Article
- Corneal Nerve Abnormalities in Painful Dry Eye Disease Patients.Biomedicines · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the clinical characteristics of dry eye patients with ocular neuropathic pain features according to the types of sensitization based on the Ocular Pain Assessment Survey (OPAS).
methodsCross-sectional study of 33 patients with dry eye and ocular neuropathic pain features. All patients had a comprehensive ophthalmic assessment including detailed history, the intensity and duration of ocular pain, the tear film, ocular surface, and Meibomian gland examination, and OPAS. Patients with < 50% improvement in pain intensity after proparacaine challenge test were assigned to the central-dominant sensitization group (central group) and those with ≥50% improvement were assigned to the peripheral-dominant sensitization group (peripheral group). All variables were compared between the two groups.
resultsNo significant differences were observed in age, sex, underlying diseases, history of ocular surgery, duration of ocular pain, tear film, ocular surface and Meibomian gland parameters (all p > 0.05). Ocular pain and non-ocular pain severity and the percentage of time spent thinking about non-ocular pain were significantly higher in the central group than in the peripheral group (all p < 0.05). Central group complained more commonly of a burning sensation than did the peripheral group (p = 0.01).
conclusionsPatients with central-dominant sensitization may experience more intense ocular and non-ocular pain than the others and burning sensation may be a key symptom in those patients.
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.