ArticleScientific reports2017
Pediatric vision screening using the plusoptiX A12C photoscreener in Chinese preschool children aged 3 to 4 years.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Scope and costs of autorefraction and photoscreening for childhood amblyopia-a systematic narrative review in relation to the EUSCREEN project data.Eye (London, England) · 2021Pooled it
- Instrument-Based Screening for the Detection of Amblyopia and Amblyopia Risk Factors: A Report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.Ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Referral rate for refractive amblyopia using automated vision screening in school children in Beirut, Lebanon.PloS one · 2025Article
- Retinoscopes: Past and present.World journal of methodology · 2024Article
- Comparison of photorefraction by Plusoptix A12 and cycloplegic autorefraction in children.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Automated screening devices for vision screening in preschool children: A comparison of the PlusoptiX S12C photoscreener and retinomax K+3 autorefractor.Frontiers in ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Instrument Referral Criteria for PlusoptiX, SPOT and 2WIN Targeting 2021 AAPOS Guidelines.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
- Artificial intelligence improves accuracy, efficiency, and reliability of a handheld infrared eccentric autorefractor for adult refractometry.International journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Comparative Validation of PlusoptiX and AI-Optic Photoscreeners in Children with High Amblyopia Risk Factor Prevalence.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
- Amblyopia risk factors among pediatric patients in a hospital-based setting using photoscreening.PloS one · 2021Article
- Development of Refractive Parameters in 3- to 6-Year-Old Children and Its Application in Myopia Prediction and Intervention Guidance.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2021Article
- Effect of birth order on stereoacuity in Chinese preschool children: a cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2020Article
- School-based epidemiology study of myopia in Tianjin, China.International ophthalmology · 2020Article
- Comparison between Plusoptix A09 and gold standard cycloplegic refraction in preschool children and agreement to detect refractive amblyogenic risk factors.Oman journal of ophthalmologyArticle
- Instrument-based, non-cycloplegic versus cycloplegic refraction in pediatric and young adult populations (≤25 years): A systematic review and meta-analysis.Advances in ophthalmology practice and researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated the performance of plusoptiX A12C in detecting amblyopia risk factors (ARFs) in Chinese children aged 3-to-4-year. PlusoptiX examination was successfully conducted among 1,766 subjects without cycloplegia to detect refractive error, asymmetry and media opacity. Cycloplegic retinoscopy (CR) was conducted on 357 children suspected of having vision abnormalities. Statistical differences between CR and the device were confirmed using the mean spherical value (+1.41 ± 0.87 D versus +1.14 ± 0.81 D), cylindrical value (-0.47 ± 0.64 versus -0.84 ± 0.78) and spherical equivalent (SE) value (+1.17 ± 0.84 D versus +0.72 ± 0.64 D) (all P < 0.0001). In the emmetropia group, the differences were statistically significant for the cylinder and SE (all P < 0.0001) but not the sphere (P = 0.33). In the hyperopia group, the differences were statistically significant for the sphere, cylinder and SE (all P < 0.0001). For refractive and strabismic ARFs detection, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated, respectively.
Indexed as
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.