Assessment of Eye-Rubbing Behavior: Goodman Score vs CAGE-Modified Criteria
Direct Answer
Neither the Goodman score nor the CAGE-modified criteria are validated tools for assessing eye-rubbing behavior in clinical practice. These assessment instruments do not appear in the ophthalmologic literature for this specific application, and the provided evidence does not support their use for evaluating eye-rubbing.
Clinical Context and Alternative Approaches
Why These Tools Are Not Applicable
The evidence base does not contain any studies validating either the Goodman score or CAGE-modified criteria for eye-rubbing assessment in keratoconus, allergic eye disease, or other conditions where eye-rubbing is clinically relevant.
The CAGE questionnaire is traditionally a screening tool for alcohol use disorders and has no established role in ophthalmologic assessment.
No "Goodman score" for eye-rubbing behavior appears in the current ophthalmologic literature or clinical guidelines.
What Should Be Used Instead
For clinical assessment of eye-rubbing behavior, rely on direct patient history and clinical examination findings rather than seeking a non-existent scoring system.
Key elements to document include:
- Frequency of eye-rubbing (times per day, duration of episodes)
- Intensity of rubbing (gentle vs vigorous, knuckle use)
- Triggers (allergies, fatigue, stress, contact lens wear)
- Associated symptoms (itching, burning, foreign body sensation)
- Ocular findings (corneal changes, conjunctival injection, papillae)
Clinical Pitfalls
Do not waste time searching for or attempting to apply unvalidated scoring systems when straightforward clinical documentation is more appropriate and evidence-based.
Eye-rubbing assessment is primarily qualitative in routine practice; quantification should focus on documenting specific behaviors and their impact on ocular health rather than applying arbitrary numerical scales.