MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Use of the Dry Eye Questionnaire to Measure Symptoms of Ocular Irritation in Patients With Aqueous Tear Deficient Dry Eye

2002· article· en· W2331843565 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carolyn G. Begley, Barbara Caffery, Robin L. Chalmers, G. Lynn Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueCornea · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEveningDrynessIrritationOphthalmologyMorningDry eyesMassageDermatologyInternal medicineSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To demonstrate the ability of the Dry Eye Questionnaire (DEQ) to characterize the frequency of ocular surface symptoms and their diurnal intensity in patients with Sjögren's syndrome (SS), keratoconjunctivitis sicca (KCS), and age-matched controls. METHODS: One hundred patients with tear-deficient dry eye from Toronto Western Hospital were mailed the DEQ and the McMonnies' questionnaire (MQ). Age- and gender-matched controls were selected from an historical data set. The DEQ measured the habitual frequency, intensity, and impact of common ocular surface symptoms and asked questions about computer use, medications, and allergies. RESULTS: Sixty-two dry eye subjects responded; 30 with SS and 32 with KCS. Compared with controls, SS subjects consistently reported the highest frequency and intensity of symptoms, followed by non-KCS subjects. The intensity of symptoms was significantly greater in the evening than in the morning among SS subjects for all symptoms except dryness and light sensitivity (p < 0.05). Sixty percent of SS subjects reported the need to stop daily activities and close their eyes due to dryness, burning, and light sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms of ocular irritation were frequent and intense among SS and KCS subjects. These symptoms often increased in intensity over the day, suggesting that open-eye conditions affect the progression of symptoms. Measurement of symptom frequency and diurnal intensity by the DEQ provides a sensitive tool that may be useful in clinical treatment trials for dry eye.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations223
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCorneaSame topicOcular Surface and Contact LensFrench-language works237,207