Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 269

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Performance of Tear Osmolarity Compared to Previous Diagnostic Tests for Dry Eye Diseases

Versura, P., Profazio, V., Campos, E. C.·2010·Current Eye Research

Abstract

PURPOSE: Tear osmolarity is considered a key point in dry eye disease (DED) and its measurement is the gold standard in dry eye diagnosis. Tear osmolarity was evaluated in dry eye (DE) patients vs. a control group to assess its diagnostic performance compared to clinical and laboratory tests performed in either clinical or research settings. METHODS: Tear osmolarity was measured with the TearLab Osmolarity System (OcuSense) in 25 normal subjects and 105 DE patients (severity score 1-4, Dry Eye Workshop (DEWS)). The following tests were also performed: Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) symptoms questionnaire, Schirmer I test, Tear Film Break Up Time (TFBUT), ferning test, lissamine green staining, tear clearance, corneal esthesiometry, and conjunctival cytology by scraping and imprint. Statistical evaluation was performed by unpaired Student's t and Mann-Whitney tests, the Spearman's rho and the Pearson's r correlation coefficients (significance p < 0.05); all variables were also analyzed for sensitivity, specificity, Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curves, likelihood ratio LR+, and positive predictive value (PPV). RESULTS: Tear osmolarity normal values were 296.5 +/- 9.8 mOsm/L, increasing values were shown stepwise DE severity (mild to moderate to severe dry eye, respectively: 298.1 +/- 10.6 vs. 306.7 +/- 9.5 vs. 314.4 +/- 10.1, p < 0.05). A progressive worsening occurred in all the parameters with DED severity increase. Tear osmolarity exhibited the larger correlation strength vs. tear clearance, TFBUT and clinical score, strength increased with DED severity, mainly to inflammatory score and corneal sensitivity. Tear osmolarity 305 mOsm/L was selected as cut-off value for dry eye, 309 mOsm/L for moderate dry eye, 318 mOsm/L for severe dry eye (Area-Under-the-Curve was 0.737, 0.759, and 0.711, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Tear osmolarity can now be considered a test suitable to be performed in a clinical setting. It showed a good performance in dry eye diagnosis, higher than the other tests considered, mainly in severe dry eye. Tear osmolarity values should be interpreted as an indicator of DED evolutionary process to severity.

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 · 10.3109/02713683.2010.484557

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.

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

Cited by

See all 269

Metadata

Authors
Versura, P., Profazio, V., & Campos, E. C.
Venue
Current Eye Research
Published
2010-07
Volume
35
Issue
7
Pages
553-564
ISSN
  • 0271-3683 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2202
OpenAlex
W2159681472
Cited by
269
References
0
FWCI
15.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Performance of Tear Osmolarity Compared to Previous Diagnostic Tests for Dry Eye Diseases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3109/02713683.2010.484557
The paper
Versura, P., Profazio, V., & Campos, E. C. (2010). Performance of Tear Osmolarity Compared to Previous Diagnostic Tests for Dry Eye Diseases. Current Eye Research. https://doi.org/10.3109/02713683.2010.484557

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.