ReviewOphthalmology and therapy2026
Dry Eye Disease: Perspectives of a Patient and Both US and UK Physicians.
Review in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dry eye disease (DED) is a multifactorial disorder of the ocular surface characterized by tear film instability and inflammation. Evaporative dry eye driven by meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) accounts for most DED cases and can cause a substantial burden on a patient's quality of life. Current treatment algorithms include lipid-containing drops and in-clinic procedures, but the reliance on trial-and-error management can result in delayed symptom relief for patients. To better illustrate the patient's lived experience of DED and the challenges of treatment options, a female patient (E.C.) in her mid-30s living with MGD-related DED collaborated with physician authors to develop this patient-led manuscript. We integrate E.C.'s narrative with a literature review and discussion of current guidelines in both the UK and the USA to examine how trial-and-error treatment approaches and limited access to advanced testing and procedures can affect patient outcomes. E.C.'s experience within the UK healthcare system illustrates how time constraints and financial barriers can delay effective treatment and contribute to patient frustration. E.C. reported fluctuating DED symptoms and poor correlation between clinical signs and symptom severity. Coupled with the feeling of being dismissed and mismanaged, E.C. felt that she needed to rely on online communities for novel therapy ideas and support to gain a better understanding of her disease. These perspectives will allow patients and clinicians to better understand the challenges of DED management and guide the development of more effective, patient-focused care pathways.
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.