ArticleScientific reports2025
Artificial intelligence models utilize lifestyle factors to predict dry eye related outcomes.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Bridging Therapeutics and Nanotechnology in Dry Eye Disease: A Review of Risk Factors, Drug Delivery Barriers, and Recent and Future Endeavors for Disease Management.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2026Review
- Morphological Characteristics of the Meibomian Glands: Impact of Demographics and Contact Lens Wear.Translational vision science & technology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine and interpret machine learning models that predict dry eye (DE)-related clinical signs, subjective symptoms, and clinician diagnoses by heavily weighting lifestyle factors in the predictions. Machine learning models were trained to take clinical assessments of the ocular surface, eyelids, and tear film, combined with symptom scores from validated questionnaire instruments for DE and clinician diagnoses of ocular surface diseases, and perform a classification into DE-related outcome categories. Outcomes are presented for which the data-driven algorithm identified subject characteristics, lifestyle, behaviors, or environmental exposures as heavily weighted predictors. Models were assessed by 5-fold cross-validation accuracy and class-wise statistics of the predictors. Age was a heavily weighted factor in predictions of eyelid notching, Line of Marx anterior displacement, and fluorescein tear breakup time (FTBUT), as well as visual analog scale symptom ratings and a clinician diagnosis of blepharitis. Comfortable contact lens wearing time was heavily weighted in predictions of DE symptom ratings. Time spent in near work, alcohol consumption, exercise, and time spent outdoors were heavily weighted predictors for several ocular signs and symptoms. Exposure to airplane cabin environments and driving a car were predictors of DE-related symptoms but not clinical signs. Prediction accuracies for DE-related symptoms ranged from 60.7 to 86.5%, for diagnoses from 73.7 to 80.1%, and for clinical signs from 66.9 to 98.7%. The results emphasize the importance of lifestyle, subject, and environmental characteristics in the etiology of ocular surface disease. Lifestyle factors should be taken into account in clinical research and care to a far greater extent than has been the case to date.
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.