ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
A Novel Noninvasive Screening Tool for Dry Eye Disease.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unveiling dry eye disease prior to cataract surgery: A multicenter clinical study.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Article
- Dry Eye Disease And The Jenvis Dry Eye Report Diagnosis Tool: A Literature Review with Emphasis On African Populations.Clinical optometry · 2026Review
- Light Discomfort Thresholds in Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Active versus Mild Non-Active Thyroid Eye Disease.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Light discomfort thresholds under different lighting conditions in healthy subjects and dry eye patients.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Dry Eye Disease: From Causes to Patient Care and Clinical Collaboration-A Narrative Review.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Review
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
purposeTo assess the feasibility and the diagnostic accuracy of the new tool, DEvice© (AI, Rome, Italy), for screening patients with dry eye disease (DED).
methodsThis study was performed at the University Magna Græcia of Catanzaro. Enrolled patients were classified as affected by DED (group 1) or not (group 2) using an already validated tool (Keratograph 5M, Oculus, Germany), evaluating the noninvasive keratograph breakup time (NIKBUT), tear meniscus height (TMH), meibomian gland loss (MGL), and bulbar redness. All the patients were then examined by means of DEvice©, which allowed the measurement of the relative humidity (RH) and temperature of the ocular surface. Symptoms were scored using the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire.
resultsOverall, 40 patients (17 males and 23 females, mean age 38.0 ± 17.1 years) were included: of these, 20 belonged to group 1 and the remaining 20 to group 2. Using Keratograph 5M, significant differences between groups 1 and 2 were detected for NIKBUT-first (respectively, 4.97 ± 1.85 vs. 13.95 ± 4.8 s;
conclusionsThe DEvice© can effectively discriminate DED patients from healthy subjects. The parameter RH showed good sensitivity, making this tool ideal for a fast and noninvasive DED screening.
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.