ArticleInternational ophthalmology2025
Clinical validation of the Standardized Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness Questionnaire in European Portuguese in a non-clinical sample.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Qualitative analysis and clinical implications of lipid layer thickness variability: A retrospective, cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Emerging Age-Specific Therapeutic Approaches for Dry Eye Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study is to determine the best cut-off value for the Standardized Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness Portuguese version questionnaire and verify possible differences between the questionnaire score and different age groups.
methodsThe clinical validation of the Standardized Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness Portuguese version was performed by completing this and the Ocular Surface Disease Index in Portuguese version questionnaire, in 180 volunteers (68.9% female), with an age range of 19-96 years.
resultsAn excellent degree of reliability was found between the Standardized Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness Portuguese version and the Ocular Surface Disease Index Portuguese version questionnaires (Cronbach's Alpha = 0.824). The Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis revealed a cut-off of 8 points (Sensitivity of 71.2% and Specificity of 71%). Furthermore, the area under the curve of the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve was 0.813, indicating that Standardized Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness Portuguese version questionnaire is a good diagnostic tool and interchangeable with the Ocular Surface Disease Index questionnaire.
conclusionThe Standardized Patient Evaluation of Eye Dryness Portuguese version questionnaire is a reliable tool for the detection of dry eye symptoms in the Portuguese population with a broad age range.
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.