ArticleScientific reports2025
Effects of artificial tears on ocular surface symptoms and visual task performance in digital device users.
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.
- Interventions for digital eye strain in adolescents: a structured review with supporting evidence from young adult populations.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Acupuncture combined with auricular acupressure for dry eye: a SPIRIT-guided protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
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
This prospective, single-arm study investigates the effects of preservative-free artificial tears on ocular symptoms, visual task performance, and tear film stability in visual display terminal (VDT) users. Thirty VDT users with digital eye strain and dryness symptoms were prescribed preservative-free artificial tears four times daily for one month. Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) and Computer-Vision Symptom Scale (CVSS17) questionnaires were collected at four visits (screening, initial, one week and one month). Blink rate and eye fixations during six simple computer tasks and out-loud reading speed were determined before and after computer use. Noninvasive tear film break-up time (NIBUT) and tear meniscus height (TMH) were also recorded. VDT users' symptoms [CVSS17 (35.70 ± 3.72 to 27.27 ± 4.43; P < 0.01); OSDI (19.99 ± 3.20 to 10.52 ± 6.04; P < 0.01)] improved after artificial tear use at final visit. Out-loud reading speed did not significantly change, although a slight improvement in the normalized value was observed after computer use between the initial (0.99 ± 0.13) and final (1.02 ± 0.15; P < 0.01) visits. No significant differences between visits were found in the blink rate, eye fixations, NIBUT or TMH. Preservative-free artificial tears effectively reduce subjective symptoms in VDT users, although this relief does not translate into measurable improvements in visual task performance or tear film metrics.
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.