ArticleIrish journal of medical science2023
Impacts of protective face masks on ocular surface symptoms among healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mask-associated dry eye disease following short-term facemask wear with or without nasal bridge taping among health workers at a Nigerian tertiary care facility: a cross-over randomized clinical trial.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Trial
- Prevalence of dry eye disease symptoms and impact on quality-of-life among hospital staff during the COVID-19 pandemic.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the impacts of prolonged protective face masks (PFM) wear on ocular surface symptoms among healthcare professionals (HCPs), and how these symptoms affected PFM wear.
methodsThirty-question survey forms were distributed via social media platform to 396 HCPs (110 doctors, 164 nurses, and 122 health technicians) between September 8 and 30, 2021. Participants who could not be reached via social media were given a face-to-face questionnaire. Aside from sociodemographic data, the questionnaire inquired about PFM wear, PFM types, ocular surface symptoms, and how PFM wear has changed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
resultsA total of 74.5% of HCPs reported wearing PFMs, mostly surgical ones (76.8%), for half a day at work but not at home, with redness (29.3%) being the most frequently encountered ocular surface symptom, followed by burning (15.7%), pain (14.1%), tingling (10.9%), and rash (6.6%). The presence of associated restrictions in conjunction with PFM-related ocular symptoms was more likely in dry and hot environments. There was no significant relationship between PFM type, PFM-wearing duration, and HCPs' daily activities (p > 0.05). Despite the lack of a significant relationship between PFM types and ocular surface symptoms (p > 0.05), there was a significant relationship between PFM-wearing duration and ocular pain (p < 0.05).
conclusionsPFM-related ocular surface symptoms can be alleviated by properly wearing PFMs, reducing wear time, and using long-acting topical lubricants. This could improve PFM wear compliance, prevent disease transmission, and ultimately help with COVID-19 protection.
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.