MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205949799 · doi:10.1097/opx.0000000000001826

Effect of a Novel Omega‐3 and Omega‐6 Fatty Acid Supplement on Dry Eye Disease: A 3‐month Randomized Controlled Trial

2021· article· en· W4205949799 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOptometry and Vision Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsMEG-3 (Canada)University of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOmegaOmega 3 fatty acidRandomized controlled trialMedicineFatty acidOphthalmologyChemistryInternal medicinePhysicsDocosahexaenoic acidBiochemistryPolyunsaturated fatty acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SIGNIFICANCE Supplementing diet with a novel combination of omega‐3 and omega‐6 fatty acids significantly improved symptoms in extremely symptomatic participants with dry eye disease (DED). PURPOSE This study aimed to determine the effect of daily intake of a novel combination of essential fatty acids on signs and symptoms of DED. METHODS Participants with moderate to severe DED were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, double‐masked parallel group study. Participants ingested either the treatment supplement containing omega‐3 and omega‐6 fatty acids (1200 mg eicosapentaenoic acid, 300 mg docosahexaenoic acid, 150 mg γ‐linoleic acid) or the placebo (coconut and olive oil) daily for 3 months. To determine compliance, Omega‐3 Index blood tests were conducted. At baseline and at 1 and 3 months, the following assessments were conducted: Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire and Symptom Assessment Questionnaire in Dry Eye, noninvasive tear breakup time, tear meniscus height, tear osmolarity, ocular redness, surface staining, Schirmer test, and meibography. RESULTS Fifty participants (mean ± standard deviation baseline OSDI score, 52.2 ± 16.5) completed the study: 24 randomized to treatment and 26 randomized to placebo. Although there was an improvement in OSDI score at 3 months for both groups (treatment: −13.4 points, P =. 003; placebo: −7.8 points, P =. 02), participants with baseline OSDI scores >52 demonstrated an even larger significant improvement in symptoms with the treatment at 3 months compared with baseline (n = 13, −20.8 points, P =. 002). There were no significant changes in any of the ocular assessments at 1 or 3 months (all P >. 05). After 3 months, Omega‐3 Index increased by 34% in the treatment group (baseline, 5.3 ± 0.8; 3 months, 8.0 ± 2.1; P <. 001) and did not change in the placebo group (baseline, 4.8 ± 0.8; 3 months, 4.8 ± 0.6; P =. 95). CONCLUSIONS Supplementation with eicosapentaenoic acid, docosahexaenoic acid, and γ‐linoleic acid resulted in a significant and clinically meaningful improvement of dry eye symptoms in extremely symptomatic participants with DED (OSDI ≥52).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.373 · 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