ArticleGlobal & regional health technology assessment
Determining value and the contribution of ciclosporin-based therapies in dry eye disease: a European expert MCDA pilot study.
Article in Global & regional health technology assessment. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Dry eye disease (DED) is a multifactorial, immune-mediated inflammatory condition affecting the ocular surface and lacrimal glands. Multiple ciclosporin-based therapies with different formulations are currently available in Europe, although clear guidance on their optimal use remains limited. The aim of this study was to determine the main unmet needs and the current management landscape of ciclosporin-based therapies, from the perspective of clinical experts using multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted to gather evidence for each of the MCDA framework criteria. An international expert panel of seven clinical specialists in DED from four European countries independently weighted the criteria and scored the non-comparative criteria in the evidence matrix. Results were presented and discussed in a group online session. Results: DED is a highly prevalent, chronic inflammatory disease associated with significant visual and functional burden. Its management is not uniform and often involves a stepwise approach. Recent ciclosporin-based treatment alternatives address some unmet needs; however, others-such as the need for greater standardization of diagnostic tools and improved objective markers of inflammation-remain to be addressed. Highest importance was assigned to Efficacy/effectiveness (4.7 ± 0.5), Quality of evidence (4.7 ± 0.5), and Safety/tolerability (4.6 ± 0.5) criteria, highlighting the relevance of treatment-related outcomes in clinical decision-making. Conclusions: The expert opinion, based on MCDA, enabled the identification of key value drivers and unmet needs in the current management of DED based on ciclosporin-based therapies. These early insights may contribute to promoting future work to support informed, evidence-based decision-making.
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.