MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410229901 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0323523

Efficacy of a new nanoemulsion artificial tear in dry eye disease management: Study protocol for a prospective cohort study

2025· article· en· W4410229901 on OpenAlexaff
Xu‐Lin Liao, Biyue Guo, Jingfang Bian, Peter H. Li, Jimmy Sung-Hei Tse, William Ngo, Lei Zhou, Thomas Chuen Lam

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Surface and Contact Lens
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArtificial tearsProspective cohort studyOphthalmologyCohortPopulationEye dropCohort studySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dry eye disease (DED) is a complex ocular disorder with a significant prevalence worldwide, especially in the Asian population. This study aimed to investigate changes in dry eye symptoms and signs following regular use of a new nanoemulsion eye drop, Systane COMPLETE Multi-Dose Preservative-Free (MDPF), in patients with mild to moderate DED in the Asian population. METHODS AND DESIGN: This is a prospective cohort study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06188260) that aims to recruit approximately 40 patients from the Asian population suffering from mild to moderate DED. Mild to moderate DED is defined according to the Tear Film and Ocular Surface Society (TFOS) Dry Eye Workshop (DEWS) II diagnostic criteria, including an Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) score between 13-32, and with at least one of the following positive signs: corneal staining, Non-Invasive Tear Breakup Time (NITBUT), or osmolarity. The proposed follow-up period is 3 months. Patients undergo three assessments: baseline before using the eye drops, and follow-up visits after 2 weeks and 3 months regular use of the eye drops (four times daily). The primary outcome is the change in the OSDI score at 2 weeks. DISCUSSION: The results examine the dry eye symptoms before and after using the new nanoemulsion eye drop, Systane COMPLETE MDPF, in a cohort of mild to moderate DED sufferers. The findings may provide new treatment options for dry eye sufferers with significant clinical implications.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicOcular Surface and Contact Lens→French-language works237,207→