The Relative Burden of Dry Eye in Patients’ Lives: Comparisons to a U.S. Normative Sample
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the relative burden of dry eye in daily life by comparing Short Form-36 (SF-36) responses from individuals with and without dry eye against U.S. norms. METHODS: Assessment of 210 people, 130 with non-Sjogren's keratoconjunctivitis sicca (non-SS KCS), 32 with Sjogren's Syndrome (SS), and 48 control subjects. The study population data and published normative SF-36 data were compared. Dry eye severity was assessed by recruited severity (control, non-SS KCS, SS), patient self-report (none, very mild/mild, moderate, severe/extremely severe), and clinician-report (none, mild, moderate, severe). Age- and gender-matched norms were compared with all defined severity groups. RESULTS: Compared with the norms, control subjects scored higher on all SF-36 scales. Effect size (ES) ranged from 0.15 to 0.52. Non-SS KCS patients had lower Role-Physical (ES=-0.07), Bodily Pain (ES=-0.08), and Vitality (ES=-0.11) scores, indicating more dry eye impact on those areas versus the norm. All SF-36 scale scores except Mental Health (ES=0.12) were lower in the SS group than the adjusted norm (ES range: -0.16 to -0.99). Regardless of severity classification, mild patients consistently had lower Role-Physical and Bodily Pain scores than the norm, suggesting impact on daily roles (ES < 0.2). Patients with moderately severe disease also experienced less vitality and poorer general health. The group with severe disease scored lower than the norm across all domains (ES range: -0.14 to -0.91) except Role-Emotional (ES=0.13) and Mental Health (ES=0.23). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate dry eye's negative impact on everyday life, particularly in daily activities. Further research using disease-specific measures to examine dry eye's impact is underway.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it