Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,422

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

TFOS DEWS II Management and Therapy Report

Open access
Jones, Lyndon, Downie, Laura E., Korb, Donald, Benitez-del-Castillo, Jose M., Dana, Reza, Deng, Sophie X., Dong, Pham N., Geerling, Gerd, Hida, Richard Yudi, Liu, Yang, Seo, Kyoung Yul, Tauber, Joseph, Wakamatsu, Tais H., Xu, Jianjiang, Wolffsohn, James S., Craig, Jennifer P.·2017·The Ocular Surface

Abstract

The members of the Management and Therapy Subcommittee undertook an evidence-based review of current dry eye therapies and management options. Management options reviewed in detail included treatments for tear insufficiency and lid abnormalities, as well as anti-inflammatory medications, surgical approaches, dietary modifications, environmental considerations and complementary therapies. Following this extensive review it became clear that many of the treatments available for the management of dry eye disease lack the necessary Level 1 evidence to support their recommendation, often due to a lack of appropriate masking, randomization or controls and in some cases due to issues with selection bias or inadequate sample size. Reflecting on all available evidence, a staged management algorithm was derived that presents a step-wise approach to implementing the various management and therapeutic options according to disease severity. While this exercise indicated that differentiating between aqueous-deficient and evaporative dry eye disease was critical in selecting the most appropriate management strategy, it also highlighted challenges, based on the limited evidence currently available, in predicting relative benefits of specific management options, in managing the two dry eye disease subtypes. Further evidence is required to support the introduction, and continued use, of many of the treatment options currently available to manage dry eye disease, as well as to inform appropriate treatment starting points and understand treatment specificity in relation to dry eye disease subtype.

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.jtos.2017.05.006

Cites

8 of 8 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 8 references

Cited by

See all 1,422

Metadata

Authors
Jones, L., Downie, L. E., Korb, D., Benitez-del-Castillo, J. M., Dana, R., Deng, S. X., Dong, P. N., Geerling, G., Hida, R. Y., Liu, Y., Seo, K. Y., Tauber, J., Wakamatsu, T. H., Xu, J., Wolffsohn, J. S., & Craig, J. P.
Venue
The Ocular Surface
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-07
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
575-628
ISSN
1542-0124 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2739410682
Cited by
1,422
References
8
FWCI
76.35
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: TFOS DEWS II Management and Therapy Report. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jtos.2017.05.006
The paper
Jones, L., Downie, L. E., Korb, D., Benitez-del-Castillo, J. M., Dana, R., Deng, S. X., Dong, P. N., Geerling, G., Hida, R. Y., Liu, Y., Seo, K. Y., Tauber, J., Wakamatsu, T. H., Xu, J., Wolffsohn, J. S., & Craig, J. P. (2017). TFOS DEWS II Management and Therapy Report. The Ocular Surface. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtos.2017.05.006

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.