ArticleBMJ open2019
Development of core outcome sets for vision screening and assessment in stroke: a Delphi and consensus study.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review on visual scanning behaviour in hemianopia considering task specificity, performance improvement, spontaneous and training-induced adaptations.Disability and rehabilitation · 2024Pooled it
- Orthoptic stroke services in the UK and Ireland: how have they evolved?Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- An international survey of optometric management of stroke survivors.Annals of medicine · 2024Article
- Assessment of visual problems after acquired brain injury: a survey of current practice in Danish hospitals.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2024Article
- A qualitative description of barriers to visual rehabilitation experienced by stroke survivors with visual impairment in Alberta, Canada.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Development of a core outcome set for evaluative research into paediatric cerebral visual impairment (CVI), in the UK and Eire.BMJ open · 2021Review
- Visual Morbidity in Stroke Survivors: A Pilot Study.Annals of Indian Academy of NeurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesVisual impairment following stroke is common with a reported incidence of visual impairment in 60% of stroke survivors. Screening for visual impairment is neither routine nor standardised. This results in a health inequality where some stroke survivors receive comprehensive vision assessment to identify any existent visual problems while others receive no vision assessment leaving them with unmet needs from undiagnosed visual problems. The aim of this study was to define two core outcome sets (COS), one for vision screening and one for full visual assessment of stroke survivors.
designA list of potentially relevant visual assessments was created from a review of the literature. The consensus process consisted of an online 3-round Delphi survey followed by a consensus meeting of the key stakeholders.
participantsStakeholders included orthoptists, occupational therapists, ophthalmologists, stroke survivors and COS users such as researchers, journal editors and guideline developers.
settingUniversity. OUTCOME MEASURES: COS.
resultsFollowing the consensus process we recommend the following nine assessments for vision screening: case history, clinical observations of visual signs, visual acuity, eye alignment position, eye movement assessment, visual field assessment, visual neglect assessment, functional vision assessment and reading assessment. We recommend the following 11 assessments for full vision assessment: case history, observations, visual acuity, eye alignment position, eye movement assessment, binocular vision assessment, eye position measurement, visual field assessment, visual neglect assessment, functional vision assessment, reading assessment and quality of life questionnaires.
conclusionsCOS are defined for vision screening and full vision assessment for stroke survivors. There is potential for their use in reducing heterogeneity in routine clinical practice and for improving standardisation and accuracy of vision assessment. Future research is required to evaluate the use of these COS and for further exploration of core outcome measures.
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.