ArticleSafety and health at work2026
Dryness Response of the Ocular Surface With Use of Wearable Ventilation for Improving Air Quality and Comfort.
Article in Safety and health at work, 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
Background: Wearable ventilation paradigms have been increasingly proposed for various polluted workplaces due to its effectiveness in improving air quality and comfort but the impact of air movement on eye dryness has not been adequately addressed. Methods: This study investigated the subjective perceptions and objective ocular surface dryness responses of 12 participants in a wearable ventilation environment. Experiments were conducted under three thermal conditions: isothermal air supply at 26°C, isothermal air supply at 32°C, and cool air supply at 32°C. Results: The perceived air quality improved continuously with increasing air supply time. Thermal acceptability in hot environments was significantly enhanced after ventilation. Participants found the experimental air velocity range of 1.0-1.6 m/s and the associated eye dryness to be acceptable. However, objective measurements revealed that after air supply, blinking frequency increased by 25-60%, tear film break-up time decreased by 30-43%, and the ocular surface discomfort index increased. Ophthalmologists indicated these changes signify a health risk for dry eye syndrome. Conclusion: The results highlight potential health risks under current wearable ventilation environments and subjective assessments method for air movement acceptability. These findings have important implications for the design and implementation of wearable ventilation systems.
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.