ArticleArquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia
Mass variability in drops of multidose eyedrops: a quality and reliability study.
Article in Arquivos brasileiros de oftalmologia. 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.
- Patient Perspectives on Handling Single-Dose versus Multi-Dose Eye Drops: A Cross-Over Study.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis quality and reliability study aimed to identify the mass variability of multidose eyedrops and to verify the existence of a reference pattern for the drop volume of eyedrops using standard lubricant eyedrops available on the Brazilian market.
methodsFive brands of lubricant eyedrops were evaluated. An ideal standard 20 µL drop of eyedrops from each manufacturer was captured using an adjustable micropipette. The eyedrop bottles were randomly selected, and five measurements of the samples' masses were collected using calibrated precision scales.
resultsThe mass of the 20 µL samples varied significantly (p<0.001) among the different manufacturers. However, among eyedrops of the same brand, mass variation was not statistically different. The global mean mass of all weighed drops was 18.24 mg, and non-uniformity was identified across all eyedrop brands.
conclusionSignificant variations in the drop masses of common lubricant eyedrops were identified using standard laboratory equipment. Heterogeneity in the drop volume of standard eyedrop medications suggest that potential dosage discrepancies exist, possibly altering treatment efficacy. A pre-established reference measure may lead to the production of more appropriately sized eyedrops for use in human eyes.
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.