ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Grading Scales of Conjunctival Inflammation.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Smartphone-Based Automated Quantification of Bulbar Conjunctival Hyperemia Using Vessel Density Mapping.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Conjunctival Vascular Metrics Using Automated Vessel Detection from Slit Lamp Images for Hyperemia Severity Assessment.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conjunctival inflammation assessment is fundamental for diagnosing and monitoring various ocular surface diseases. This review summarizes grading scales available for conjunctival inflammation, discussing both subjective and objective methodologies. Widely used clinical grading systems include slit-lamp findings classification scale, Mandell scale for conjunctival injection, McMonnies and Champman-Davies scale, CCLRU (Cornea and Contact Lens Research Unit) scale, Efron scale, and VBR (validated bulbar redness) scale. They provide standardized frameworks for assessing conjunctival hyperemia and inflammation severity. However, these subjective methods are limited by inter-observer variability and lack of precision in detecting subtle changes. Recent technological advances have introduced objective digital imaging systems and automated algorithms that may offer improved reproducibility and sensitivity. Novel approaches include the integration of artificial intelligence for automated assessment. The validation of these scales across diverse patient populations has demonstrated varying degrees of reliability and clinical utility. Current evidence suggests that while traditional subjective scales remain clinically relevant, objective measurement systems provide superior repeatability and may better serve research applications requiring precise quantification of inflammatory changes. This review summarizes current knowledge regarding conjunctival inflammation grading methodologies and provides insights into novel developments in the field.
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.