Trial reportEye (London, England)2025
Randomized, double-masked, sham-controlled trial of efficacy and safety of quantum molecular resonance for treating meibomian gland dysfunction.
Trial report in Eye (London, England), 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.
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
backgroundThis randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial aimed to evaluate the novel quantum molecular resonance (QMR) device for meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD) treatment.
methodsEighty participants diagnosed with MGD were randomized into QMR or sham-QMR groups. Each procedure was performed on days 0, 7, 14, and 21. Primary (meibum quality score) and other secondary outcomes were examined at baseline and weeks 7 and 11. Tear osmolarity and interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-1 receptor agonist levels were evaluated at baseline and week 7. Adverse events were recorded. A multilevel mixed-effect linear regression model was used for data analysis.
resultsMeibum quality (p = 0.008), corneal/conjunctival fluorescein staining score (p = 0.036), telangiectatic vessel area (p = 0.008), and superior (p = 0.011) and inferior (p = 0.020) lid meiboscale were significantly improved in the QMR group than those in the sham-treated group at week 11. Superior lid meiboscale (p = 0.027) and meibomian gland plugging grade (MGPG) (p = 0.017) were significantly improved in the QMR group at week 7. In the QMR group, Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) scores and lid margin thickening grades were significantly lesser at weeks 7 (p = 0.002 and <0.001, respectively) and 11 (both p < 0.001) than the baseline values. At week 7, IL-6 levels were significantly decreased only in the QMR group (p = 0.016). All other parameters did not significantly differ. No serious adverse event occurred.
conclusionsThe QMR device was effective for MGD treatment, with improvements in meibum quality, corneal/conjunctival staining, telangiectatic vessels, MGPG, superior and inferior lid meiboscale, and decreased OSDI score, lid margin thickening grade, and tear IL-6 level.
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.