The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Diagnosing the severity of dry eye: a clear and practical algorithm
Open accessAbstract
Dry eye disease (DED) is a distressing ocular condition. Due to its multifactorial nature, clinical and biological signs of DED can be inconsistent and sometimes discordant with symptomatology. Consequently, no gold-standard model for determining DED severity exists. This can impact treatment decisions and complicate evaluation of disease progression, particularly within the stringent context of clinical trials. The multinational ODISSEY European Consensus Group is comprised of ophthalmologists who contend with ocular surface disease issues on a daily basis. This group convened to establish a clear and practical algorithm for evaluation and diagnosis of severe DED. Using a consensus-based approach, they assessed 14 commonly used DED severity criteria. The panel agreed that following confirmed DED diagnosis, just two criteria, symptom-based assessment and corneal fluorescein staining were sufficient to diagnose the presence of severe DED in the majority of patients. In the event of discordance between signs and symptoms, further evaluation using additional determinant criteria was recommended. This report presents the ODISSEY European Consensus Group recommended algorithm for DED evaluation, which facilitates diagnosis of severe disease even in the event of discordance between signs and symptoms. It is intended that this algorithm will be useful in a clinical and developmental setting.
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
Cited by
TFOS DEWS II Epidemiology Report
Stapleton, F., Alves, M., Bunya, V. Y., Jalbert, I., Lekhanont, K., Malet, F., Na, K.-S., Schaumberg, D., Uchino, M., Vehof, J., et al. (2017) · The Ocular Surface · doi:10.1016/j.jtos.2017.05.003 · Cited by 2,618
TFOS DEWS II Diagnostic Methodology report
Wolffsohn, J. S., Arita, R., Chalmers, R., Djalilian, A., Dogru, M., Dumbleton, K., Gupta, P. K., Karpecki, P., Lazreg, S., Pult, H., et al. (2017) · The Ocular Surface · doi:10.1016/j.jtos.2017.05.001 · Cited by 2,122
TFOS DEWS II Management and Therapy Report
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., et al. (2017) · The Ocular Surface · doi:10.1016/j.jtos.2017.05.006 · Cited by 1,422
Self-citationEULAR recommendations for the management of Sjogren's syndrome with topical and systemic therapies
Ramos-Casals, M., Brito-Zerón, P., Bombardieri, S., Bootsma, H., De Vita, S., Dörner, T., Fisher, B. A., Gottenberg, J.-E., Hernandez-Molina, G., Kocher, A., et al. (2020) · Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases · doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2019-216114 · Cited by 732
Associations between signs and symptoms of dry eye disease: a systematic review
Bartlett, J., Keith, M., Sudharshan, L., & Snedecor, S. (2015) · Clinical Ophthalmology · doi:10.2147/opth.s89700 · Cited by 268
Metadata
- Authors
- Baudouin, C., Aragona, P., Van Setten, G., Rolando, M., Irkeç, M., Benítez del Castillo, J., Geerling, G., Labetoulle, M., Bonini, S., & ODISSEY European Consensus Group members
- Venue
- British Journal of Ophthalmology
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2014-03-13
- Volume
- 98
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1168-1176
- ISSN
- 0007-1161 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2079
- OpenAlex
- W2032734824
- Cited by
- 236
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 18.38
- 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: Diagnosing the severity of dry eye: a clear and practical algorithm. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-304619
- The paper
- Baudouin, C., Aragona, P., Van Setten, G., Rolando, M., Irkeç, M., Benítez del Castillo, J., Geerling, G., Labetoulle, M., Bonini, S., & ODISSEY European Consensus Group members. (2014). Diagnosing the severity of dry eye: a clear and practical algorithm. British Journal of Ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-304619
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.