ArticlePloS one2019
In-school eyecare in special education settings has measurable benefits for children's vision and behaviour.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The impact of spectacle correction on the well-being of children with vision impairment due to uncorrected refractive error: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical assessment, investigation, diagnosis and initial management of cerebral visual impairment: a consensus practice guide.Eye (London, England) · 2023Guideline
- The NR2F1-Related 5q14.3-q21.1 deletion causing periventricular heterotopia with cerebral visual impairment: a longitudinal case report and genotype-phenotype analysis.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Early years examination to identify suspect cerebral visual impairment (EYE-CVI): a feasibility study.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Article
- A school-based intervention to improve mental health outcomes for children with cerebral visual impairment (CVI): feasibility cluster randomised trial.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2025Article
- Identification of Suspect-Cerebral Visual Impairment in Children with Special Needs: Moving Towards an Inclusive Diagnostic Process.The British and Irish orthoptic journal · 2025Article
- Social and Quality-of-Life Impact of Refractive Surgery in Children With Developmental Disorders and Spectacle Nonadherence.American journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Article
- The Assessment of Vision in Children with Severe Learning Difficulties: A Systematic Review.The British and Irish orthoptic journal · 2024Review
- Hiding in plain sight: children with visual perceptual difficulties in schools.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Review
- Spectrum of Visual Dysfunction Detected by a Novel Testing Protocol Within a Special School Eye Care Service.The British and Irish orthoptic journal · 2024Article
- Amblyopia and the whole child.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2023Review
- Vision function in children 10 years after grade 3 or 4 intraventricular haemorrhage with ventricular dilation: A masked prospective study.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2023Article
- Article
- Comparison of unmet health care needs in children with intellectual disability, autism spectrum disorder and both disorders combined.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2022Article
- Impact of visual impairment on balance and visual processing functions in students with special educational needs.PloS one · 2022Article
- Cortical Visual Impairments and Learning Disabilities.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Review
- Eye Care for Children in Special Schools: An Audit of Provision.The British and Irish orthoptic journal · 2021Article
- The Underreporting of Visual Issues in Statutory Education Documents: Comment on Harvey et al. (2020).Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine whether implementation of comprehensive in-school eyecare results in measurable benefits for children and young people in terms of visual status, classroom behaviours and how well their visual needs are met.
designSchool-based observational study. PARTICIPANTS &
methods200 pupils [mean age 10 years 9 months, 70% male, majority moderate (40%) or severe (35%) learning difficulty] of a special education school in the UK. A sector-agreed in-school eyecare framework including full eye examination and cycloplegic refraction, dispensing of spectacles (as appropriate) and written reporting of outcomes to parents/teachers was applied. Classroom behaviours were observed and recorded prior to, and after, the in-school eyecare. Surveys were employed to obtain visual histories from parents/teachers. School records and statutory documents were reviewed for diagnostic and learning disability classifications. Visual function and ocular health were profiled at baseline and significant visual deficits identified. Where such deficits were previously unrecognised, untreated or not compensated for (e.g. correction of refractive error, enlargement of educational material) they were recorded as 'unmet visual need'. At follow-up, 2-5 months after initial (baseline) measures, eye examinations, parent/teacher surveys and behaviour observations were repeated. Follow-up measures were used to determine if measurable improvements were evident in visual function, ocular health, the level of unmet need and classroom behaviour following implementation of in-school eyecare.
results199 participants completed baseline and follow-up measures. 122 (61%) participants presented with at least one significant visual or ocular health deficit and 90 (45%) participants had at least one unmet visual need. Younger pupils and those with no previous history of eyecare were more likely to demonstrate unmet visual needs at baseline (OR 1.12 95% CI 1.03 to 1.21) p = 0.012; (OR 4.44 95% CI 1.38 to 14.29 p = 0.007 respectively). On follow-up, the number of pupils with unmet visual needs dropped significantly to 36 (18%) (McNemar's test p<0.001). Visual and behavioural metrics of participants without significant visual deficits or whose visual needs were adequately addressed at baseline remained relatively unchanged between baseline and follow-up (Wilcoxon signed rank p>0.05). Where significant refractive deficits were corrected at follow-up, near visual acuity improved significantly (Wilcoxon signed rank p = 0.013), however, poor spectacle compliance was a persistent cause of unmet visual need. Off-task behaviour reduced significantly after actions to address unmet visual needs were communicated to parents and teachers (Wilcoxon signed rank p = 0.035).
conclusionsThe present study demonstrates for the first time measurable visual and behaviour benefits to children in special education settings when they receive comprehensive in-school eye examinations, on-site spectacle dispensing and jargon-free reporting of outcomes to teachers and parents.
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.