ArticlePloS one2022
Effect of storage temperature on the dispersibility of commercially available 0.1% fluorometholone ophthalmic suspension.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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.
- Next-gen novel nanocage-based multivalent vaccine candidate to tackle the rising menace of Mpox.NPJ vaccines · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we focused on the storage conditions and investigated the effects of low-temperature storage (10°C) on the dispersibility of active components in three formulations of fluorometholone (FLU) suspension eye-drops (one original drug and two generic drugs, P1-P3). For all three eye-drop products, before shaking by hand, white sediment anticipated to be the principal active component was seen at the vial base. In the ordinary-temperature storage group, the FLU contents per drop after shaking by hand were 0.076% in P1, 0.023% in P2, and 0.100% in P3, and the content in P2 was significantly lower than that in P1 and P3. In contrast, almost no dispersion was observed in the low-temperature group. The results after sufficient shaking of these samples with a vortex, in contrast, were such that the FLU contents per drop were 0.063% in P1, 0.086% in P2, and 0.088% in P3; the content in P1 was significantly lower than that in P2 and P3, and there was no difference between P2 and P3. Moreover, we evaluated the dispersibility according to the evaluation "Vs / (ρg - ρf) g." In both the low- and ordinary-temperature storage groups, the value of Vs / (ρg - ρf) g, proportional to the terminal velocity, decreased in the following order: P3 > P1 ≫ P2, and each value in the ordinary-temperature was higher than that in low temperature. The zeta potential decreased in the following order: P2 > P3 ≫ P1. In conclusion, when FLU suspension eye drops are stored at low temperatures until use, such as in a refrigerator, ordinary shaking does not help achieve dispersion to the specified concentration, and even with vigorous shaking with some formulations, the specified concentration cannot be achieved.
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.