ArticleJournal of ophthalmology2015
The Arclight Ophthalmoscope: A Reliable Low-Cost Alternative to the Standard Direct Ophthalmoscope.
Article in Journal of ophthalmology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eyesi direct ophthalmoscope simulator: an effective training tool for medical undergraduates.BMC medical education · 2024Trial
- Does access to a portable ophthalmoscope improve skill acquisition in direct ophthalmoscopy? A method comparison study in undergraduate medical education.BMC medical education · 2019Trial
- Structured simulation-based training with frugal ophthalmic instruments rapidly equips non-ophthalmologists to identify malarial retinopathy in simulation eyes: an audit of a training course.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- The Comparison Between Arclight Loupe and Handheld Slit Lamp in Anterior Segment Eye Disease Diagnosis.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Red reflex examination in reproductive and child health clinics for early detection of paediatric cataract and ocular media disorders: cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy and feasibility studies from Kilimanjaro, Tanzania.Eye (London, England) · 2021Article
- Teaching Smartphone Funduscopy with 20 Diopter Lens in Undergraduate Medical Education.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2021Article
- Rationale and feasibility of a combined rapid assessment of avoidable blindness and hearing loss protocol.PloS one · 2020Article
- The Arclight and how to use it.Community eye health · 2019Article
- Comparative evaluation of a novel solar powered low-cost ophthalmoscope (Arclight) by eye healthcare workers in Malawi.BMJ innovations · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Background. The Arclight ophthalmoscope is a low-cost alternative to standard direct ophthalmoscopes. This study compared the Arclight ophthalmoscope with the Heine K180 direct ophthalmoscope to evaluate its reliability in assessing the vertical cup disc ratio (VCDR) and its ease of use (EOU). Methods. Eight medical students used both the Arclight and the Heine ophthalmoscopes to examine the optic disc in 9 subjects. An EOU score was provided after every examination (a higher score indicating that the ophthalmoscope is easier to use). A consultant ophthalmologist provided the reference standard VCDR. Results. 288 examinations were performed. The number of examinations that yielded an estimation of the VCDR was significantly higher for the Arclight ophthalmoscope (125/144, 85%) compared to the Heine ophthalmoscope (88/144, 61%) (p < 0.001). The mean difference from the reference standard VCDR was similar for both instruments, with a mean of -0.078 (95% CI: -0.10 to -0.056) for the Arclight and -0.072 (95% CI: -0.097 to -0.046) for Heine (p = 0.69). The overall EOU score was significantly higher for the Arclight ophthalmoscope (p < 0.001). Conclusion. The Arclight ophthalmoscope performs as well as, and is easier to use than, a standard direct ophthalmoscope, suggesting it is a reliable, low-cost alternative.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.