Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37304329›Full record

ReviewClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2023

How Can We Best Diagnose Severity Levels of Dry Eye Disease: Current Perspectives.

Thomas Chester, Sumit Sam Garg, Josh Johnston, Brandon Ayers, Preeya Gupta

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 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 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Thomas ChesterCleveland Eye Clinic, Brecksville, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9078-6670
Sumit Sam GargDepartment of Ophthalmology, Gavin Herbert Eye Institute, University of California-Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5081-0771
Josh JohnstonGeorgia Eye Partners, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Brandon AyersOphthalmic Partners PC, Cornea Service, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Preeya GuptaTriangle Eye Consultants, Raleigh, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0895-7870
Cleveland Eye Clinic · USSouthern College of Optometry · USTulane University · USUniversity of California, Irvine · USWills Eye Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dry eye disease (DED) is a common ocular condition, but the diagnosis relative to other ocular conditions and the evaluation of severity of the condition has often been difficult. This challenge can be due to clinical signs and symptoms not always correlating with each other. An understanding of the various components which create the condition, as well as the diagnostic measures used to evaluate these components, is useful to the clinician working with DED patients. This review paper will discuss traditional diagnostic options, diagnostic imaging, and Advanced Point of Care testing capabilities to determine the severity level of dry eye disease more adequately.

Indexed as

biomarkersdiagnostic imagingdry eye diseasePOC testing

Identifiers

PMID37304329
PMCPMC10254642
OpenAlexW4379473748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.