Trial reportScientific reports2025
Clinical observation of esculin and digitalisglycosides eye drops with 0.3% sodium hyaluronate eye drops for dry eye disease: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Palladium nanozyme loaded metal-organic framework eyedrops alleviate oxidative stress for dry eye treatment.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dry eye disease (DED) is a common ocular surface disorder. Esculin and digitalis possess anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidant properties, which may benefit patients with DED. This study aimed to assess the therapeutic efficacy of esculin and digitalis glycosides (EAD) eye drops, either alone or in combination with 0.3% sodium hyaluronate (SH) eye drops, in treating DED. In this randomized controlled trial, 78 participants with DED (78 eyes) were included and divided into three groups: Group A received 0.3% SH, Group B received EAD, and Group C received 0.3% SH combined with EAD eye drops for 4 weeks. The efficacy of the treatments was assessed at 2 and 4 weeks using the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI), tear break-up time (TBUT), Schirmer I test (SIt), and corneal fluorescein staining (CFS) as primary evaluation metrics. After 4 weeks of treatment, Group A showed a decrease in OSDI and an increase in SIT (p < 0.05). Group B showed a decrease in OSDI score (P < 0.05) and a significant improvement in SIt (P < 0.01). Group C demonstrated a significant increase in both TBUT and SIt values at the 2-week mark. Improvements were noted across all parameters, including OSDI score, TBUT, SIt, and CFS score after 4 weeks of treatment (P < 0.05). The total effective rate for participants in Group C was 88.46%, significantly higher than Group A's rate of 65.38% (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the combination of EAD eye drops with 0.3% SH eye drops proved more effective than either treatment alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.