SynthesisBMC ophthalmology2026
The effects of different forms of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids on dry eye disease resulting from various etiologies: a meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC ophthalmology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the therapeutic effects of omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) supplements across different formulations and dry eye disease (DED) etiologies.
methodsStudies were systematically searched in six databases without language restrictions. Dry eye symptom scores, tear break-up time (TBUT), Schirmer test, corneal fluorescein staining (CFS), and meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) scores were extracted as outcomes. Meta-regression, sensitivity and subgroup analyses were implemented to investigate significant heterogeneity.
resultsTwenty-seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Systemic omega-3 supplementation appeared to improve all assessed outcomes in the overall pooled analysis; however, subgroup analyses revealed formulation- and etiology-dependent effects. Among systemic long-chain omega-3 formulations, efficacy was etiology-dependent: no significant benefits were observed in MGD-associated dry eye or in cases of unspecified etiology, whereas significant improvements were found in video display terminal-related dry eye and contact lens-associated dry eye. Given the limited evidence, findings were synthesized qualitatively: omega-3 supplements demonstrated beneficial effects in rosacea-associated and Sjögren's syndrome-related dry eye, whereas no clinically meaningful improvement was observed in LASIK-induced dry eye. In contrast, neither systemic short-chain fatty acids nor the combination of long- and short-chain omega-3 PUFAs achieved statistical significance. Furthermore, topical omega-3 delivery failed to demonstrate significant benefits compared with artificial tears. Meta-regression analysis revealed a significant association between omega-3 supplementation and several external factors, including mean age, geographic location, assessment methodologies, omega-3 dose, and publication year.
conclusionsOur research suggests that omega-3 supplements in different forms fail to demonstrate consistent effectiveness for DED of various etiological origins. Therefore, personalized guidance from healthcare providers regarding the application of omega-3 PUFAs for the management of ocular surface disorders is warranted. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42024623916.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42304315What 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.