How Dry Eye Diaries Creates Content
Dry Eye Diaries is a patient-led educational project about dry eye disease, meibomian gland dysfunction (MGD), the ocular surface, treatments and emerging research.
The website grew out of my own experience of living with severe dry eye and trying to understand a condition that can be surprisingly complex.
I am a patient, not a doctor or medical professional. My goal is not to provide medical advice, diagnose conditions or tell readers which treatments they should choose.
My goal is to make dry-eye information and research easier for patients to understand — while being clear about the difference between scientific evidence, emerging research and personal experience.
This Editorial Policy explains how content on Dry Eye Diaries is researched, written and updated.
Our Sources
For medical and scientific content, I try to work as close to the original evidence as possible.
Sources may include:
- •peer-reviewed scientific studies and reviews;
- •publications indexed in PubMed;
- •reports and publications from the Tear Film & Ocular Surface Society (TFOS);
- •clinical guidelines and consensus reports;
- •academic journals in ophthalmology, optometry and ocular-surface research;
- •clinical trial registries and regulatory sources when discussing treatments in development;
- •established professional ophthalmology and optometry publications, particularly when following new research or developments in the field.
Whenever possible, I prefer the original study or primary source rather than relying only on a news article, clinic website or secondary summary.
Sources and further reading are provided with medical and research-based articles so readers can explore the evidence themselves.
Evidence, Uncertainty and Emerging Research
Dry-eye research is constantly evolving.
Not every question has a clear answer, and not every treatment has the same level of evidence behind it.
When discussing research, I try to distinguish between:
- •well-established evidence;
- •promising but preliminary findings;
- •clinical hypotheses;
- •questions that remain uncertain or controversial.
A single study does not automatically establish a medical fact.
When relevant, articles consider factors such as study size, study design, limitations, whether findings have been replicated and whether the research was performed in humans, animals or laboratory models.
When the evidence is uncertain, I try to say so rather than present a developing idea as an established conclusion.
Personal Experience vs. Medical Evidence
Personal experience is an important part of Dry Eye Diaries — but it is not the same thing as scientific evidence.
When I write about treatments or my own recovery, I may describe what happened to my eyes, what I believe helped me, what did not help me, or what I would personally approach differently today.
These experiences should not be interpreted as evidence that another person will have the same result.
Where an article combines my experience with medical information, I try to make the distinction clear.
"This happened to me" is a personal experience.
"Research has found..." requires evidence.
Both can be valuable, but they answer different questions.
Treatment Information
Dry Eye Diaries discusses many treatments because understanding treatment options is an important part of understanding dry-eye disease.
Mentioning or explaining a treatment does not mean that I recommend it.
When discussing treatments, the aim is to explain questions such as:
- •What is the treatment intended to do?
- •Which dry-eye mechanism is it designed to target?
- •What does the available evidence show?
- •What are the limitations or uncertainties?
- •What risks or adverse effects have been reported?
Treatment decisions should be made with an appropriately qualified healthcare professional who can evaluate an individual's eyes, medical history and circumstances.
Research & What's New
The Research & What's New section follows new studies, treatments, clinical trials and developments in dry-eye and ocular-surface research.
New does not necessarily mean better.
A new study may be interesting without being practice-changing. An experimental treatment may show promising early results without yet being proven safe or effective. A conference presentation or company announcement does not carry the same evidentiary weight as a completed peer-reviewed clinical trial.
For that reason, these articles aim not only to explain what researchers found, but also:
- •what they actually studied;
- •how strong the evidence is;
- •what the findings might mean;
- •what the study does not yet prove.
When treatments are still experimental, investigational or not approved for a particular use, I aim to make that status clear.
Independence and Commercial Content
Editorial content is not written to promote a particular clinic, doctor, device, pharmaceutical company or treatment.
If Dry Eye Diaries ever receives payment, free products, sponsorship, affiliate compensation or another material benefit connected with content, that relationship will be clearly disclosed.
Sponsored or commercial relationships, if any, will not be presented as independent medical evidence.
Personal experience with a product or treatment will also be identified as personal experience rather than a clinical recommendation.
Corrections and Updates
Medical knowledge changes, and Dry Eye Diaries is intended to change with it.
Articles may be updated when:
- •important new research becomes available;
- •recommendations or regulatory status change;
- •better evidence becomes available;
- •an error or unclear statement is identified;
- •additional context is needed.
Where appropriate, pages may display a published date and last updated date.
If I discover a meaningful factual error, my aim is to correct it rather than leave outdated or inaccurate information online.
No Medical Advice
Dry Eye Diaries provides educational information and shares personal experience.
It does not provide individual medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Dry eye can have many different causes and contributing factors, and symptoms that appear to be dry eye may sometimes have another explanation.
Information from this website should therefore not replace an examination, diagnosis or treatment plan from a qualified healthcare professional.
For more information, please read the Medical Disclaimer.
Our Editorial Principle
There is a simple principle behind Dry Eye Diaries:
Be curious about the science, honest about uncertainty, and clear about the difference between evidence and experience.
Dry eye is complicated enough already.
The purpose of this website is not to make it sound simpler than it is, nor to make it more frightening.
It is to help patients understand it better.