ArticlePloS one2024
Tolerability of Diquas LX on tear film and meibomian glands findings in a real clinical scenario.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Incomplete rather than complete nasolacrimal duct obstruction Is strongly associated with meibomian gland dysfunction in postmenopausal women with PANDO: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Tear film and meibomian gland parameters associated with the effectiveness of intense pulsed light therapy for meibomian gland dysfunction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Applications of Diquafosol Sodium in Ophthalmology: A Comprehensive Review of Therapeutic Utility.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A clinical study to evaluate meibomian gland dysfunction and tear film changes in patients with pterygium.Bioinformation · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Long-acting diquafosol ophthalmic solution (DQS-LX) has significant advantages regarding patient adherence owing to the reduced frequency of required eye drops; however, some patients prefer conventional diquafosol ophthalmic solution (DQS) over DQS-LX. Herein, to clarify the characteristics of patients according to their preference for ophthalmic solutions, dry eye (DE) and meibomian gland (MG) findings were retrospectively investigated. This study enrolled 341 patients with DE (mean age, 62.1 ± 11.7 years) treated at the Itoh Clinic between November 8, 2022, and July 31, 2023, who switched from DQS to DQS-LX. Patients were divided into two groups: those who continued DQS-LX administration (DQS-LX group) and those who wished to revert to conventional DQS (DQS group). Data regarding subjective symptoms assessed using the Standard Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness (SPEED) questionnaire, tear film breakup time (BUT), tear meniscus height (TMH), corneal and conjunctival fluorescein staining (CFS), conjunctival hyperemia/papilla, meiboscore, plugging, vascularity, meibum grade, and Schirmer's score at the time of DQS-LX switch were evaluated. Of the 341 patients, 31 (9.1%) wished to revert to conventional DQS. In total, 16 eyes of 16 patients in the DQS group and 32 eyes of 32 patients in the DQS-LX group-for whom complete data were available-were included in the analysis. The DQS-LX group had higher SPEED scores, lower TMHs (P < 0.001, respectively), shorter FBUTs, greater CFS findings, larger meibum grades, lower Schirmer scores, and more pluggings compared with the DQS group (P = 0.005, 0.001, 0.001, 0.046, 0.003, respectively). Meiboscores and vascularity did not differ significantly between the two groups (P = 0.73 and 0.39, respectively). In conclusion, patients with low tear film volume and DE complicated by moderate or severe meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) preferred DQS-LX, while those with allergic findings preferred conventional DQS.
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.