ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2017
Comparing Interrater reliability between eye examination and eye self-examination 1.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2017. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eye Dominance and Testing Order Effects in the Circularly-Oriented Macular Pigment Optical Density Measurements.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveto compare Interrater reliability concerning two eye assessment methods.
methodquasi-experimental study conducted with 324 college students including eye self-examination and eye assessment performed by the researchers in a public university. Kappa coefficient was used to verify agreement.
resultsreliability coefficients between Interraters ranged from 0.85 to 0.95, with statistical significance at 0.05. The exams to check for near acuity and peripheral vision presented a reasonable kappa >0.2. The remaining coefficients were higher, ranging from very to totally reliable.
conclusioncomparatively, the results of both methods were similar. The virtual manual on eye self-examination can be used to screen for eye conditions.
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.