The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prevalence of Dry Eye Among the Elderly
Open accessAbstract
PURPOSE: To study the demographics and estimate the prevalence of dry eye among elderly Americans. METHODS: A population-based prevalence study was performed in 2,520 residents of Salisbury, Maryland, aged 65 years and older as of September 1993. The population was derived from the Health Care Financing Administration Medicare database. After completing a standardized questionnaire pertaining to dry eye symptoms, 2,420 subjects underwent Schirmer and rose bengal tests and anatomic assessment of the meibomian glands. RESULTS: In this population, 14.6% (363/2,482) were symptomatic, defined as reporting one or more dry eye symptoms often or all the time; 2.2% (53/2,448) were symptomatic and had a low Schirmer test result (< or = 5 mm), and 2% (48/2,432) were symptomatic and had a high rose bengal test score (> or = 5). Furthermore, 3.5% (84/2,425) were symptomatic and had either a low Schirmer score or a high rose bengal score, and 0.7% (17/2,420) were symptomatic and had both a low Schirmer score and a high rose bengal score. No association of symptoms or signs was seen with age, sex, or race. Although anatomic features of meibomianitis were associated with the presence of symptoms (P = .01), 76% (67/88) of the individuals with these anatomic features were asymptomatic; 10.5% (260/2,480) reported that they currently use artificial tears or lubricants. CONCLUSIONS: Symptoms and signs of dry eye are common among the elderly but were not associated with age, race, or sex in this population-based sample of elderly Americans. Extrapolating to the United States population aged 65 to 84 years, the study yields an estimate of 4.3 million who experience symptoms of ocular irritation often or all the time.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6 · Cited by 88,282
Cited by
Sall, K., Stevenson, O. D., Mundorf, T. K., & Reis, B. L. (2000) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/s0161-6420(99)00176-1 · Cited by 916
De Paiva, C. S., Corrales, R. M., Villarreal, A. L., Farley, W. J., Li, D.-Q., Stern, M. E., & Pflugfelder, S. C. (2006) · Experimental Eye Research · doi:10.1016/j.exer.2006.02.004 · Cited by 451
Short-term Consumption of Oral Omega-3 and Dry Eye Syndrome
Kangari, H., Eftekhari, M. H., Sardari, S., Hashemi, H., Salamzadeh, J., Ghassemi-Broumand, M., & Khabazkhoob, M. (2013) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.04.006 · Cited by 128
Challenges and Pitfalls in Clinical Trials of Treatments for Dry Eye
Foulks, G. N. (2003) · The Ocular Surface · doi:10.1016/s1542-0124(12)70004-6 · Cited by 125
KAWAKITA, T., KAWABATA, F., TSUJI, T., KAWASHIMA, M., SHIMMURA, S., & TSUBOTA, K. (2013) · Biomedical Research · doi:10.2220/biomedres.34.215 · Cited by 48
Metadata
- Authors
- SCHEIN, O. D., MUÑOz, B., TIELSCH, J. M., BANDEEN-Roche, K., & WEST, S.
- Venue
- American Journal of Ophthalmology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1997-12
- Volume
- 124
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 723-728
- ISSN
- 0002-9394 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2017282855
- Cited by
- 790
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Prevalence of Dry Eye Among the Elderly. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0002-9394(14)71688-5
- The paper
- SCHEIN, O. D., MUÑOz, B., TIELSCH, J. M., BANDEEN-Roche, K., & WEST, S. (1997). Prevalence of Dry Eye Among the Elderly. American Journal of Ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9394(14)71688-5
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.