Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 494

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Simplified Quantitative Method for Assessing Keratoconjunctivitis Sicca From the Sjögren's Syndrome International Registry

Open access
Whitcher, John P., Shiboski, Caroline H., Shiboski, Stephen C., Heidenreich, Ana Maria, Kitagawa, Kazuko, Zhang, Shunhua, Hamann, Steffen, Larkin, Genevieve, McNamara, Nancy A., Greenspan, John S., Daniels, Troy E.·2010·American Journal of Ophthalmology

Abstract

PURPOSE To describe, apply, and test a new ocular grading system for assessing keratoconjunctivitis sicca (KCS) using lissamine green and fluorescein. DESIGN Prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study. METHODS The National Institutes of Health-funded Sjögren's Syndrome International Registry (called Sjögren's International Collaborative Clinical Alliance [SICCA]) is developing standardized classification criteria for Sjögren syndrome (SS) and is creating a biospecimen bank for future research. Eight SICCA ophthalmologists developed a new quantitative ocular grading system (SICCA ocular staining score [OSS]), and we analyzed OSS distribution among the SICCA cohort and its association with other phenotypic characteristics of SS. The SICCA cohort includes participants ranging from possibly early SS to advanced disease. Procedures include sequenced unanesthetized Schirmer test, tear break-up time, ocular surface staining, and external eye examination at the slit lamp. Using statistical analyses and proportional Venn diagrams, we examined interrelationships between abnormal OSS (>or=3) and other characteristics of SS (labial salivary gland [LSG] biopsy with focal lymphocytic sialadenitis and focus score >1 positive anti-SS A antibodies, anti-SS B antibodies, or both). RESULTS Among 1208 participants, we found strong associations between abnormal OSS, positive serologic results, and positive LSG focus scores (P < .0001). Analysis of the overlapping relationships of these 3 measures defined a large group of participants who had KCS without other components of SS, representing a clinical entity distinct from the KCS associated with SS. CONCLUSIONS This new method for assessing KCS will become the means for diagnosing the ocular component of SS in future classification criteria. We find 2 forms of KCS whose causes may differ.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajo.2009.09.013

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 11 references

Cited by

See all 494

Metadata

Authors
Whitcher, J. P., Shiboski, C. H., Shiboski, S. C., Heidenreich, A. M., Kitagawa, K., Zhang, S., Hamann, S., Larkin, G., McNamara, N. A., Greenspan, J. S., & Daniels, T. E.
Venue
American Journal of Ophthalmology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-03
Volume
149
Issue
3
Pages
405-415
ISSN
0002-9394 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1969801895
Cited by
494
References
11
FWCI
6.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Simplified Quantitative Method for Assessing Keratoconjunctivitis Sicca From the Sjögren's Syndrome International Registry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ajo.2009.09.013
The paper
Whitcher, J. P., Shiboski, C. H., Shiboski, S. C., Heidenreich, A. M., Kitagawa, K., Zhang, S., Hamann, S., Larkin, G., McNamara, N. A., Greenspan, J. S., & Daniels, T. E. (2010). A Simplified Quantitative Method for Assessing Keratoconjunctivitis Sicca From the Sjögren's Syndrome International Registry. American Journal of Ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2009.09.013

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.