ArticleScientific reports2019
Refraction and pupil diameter in 3-year- and 1-month-old children as measured by Spot Vision Screener.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adherence to Red Reflex and Vision Screening Recommendations: A Deep Dive into Primary Care Implementation Gaps.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Esotropia Missed During Pre-health Checkup Screening With the Spot Vision Screener: A Case Series.Cureus · 2026Article
- Digital measurement of pupil size, corneal size, and eccentricity in Guinea pigs using python compared with traditional OCT.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Measurement Accuracy When Using Spot Vision Screener With or Without Cycloplegia in Young Adults.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2023Article
- Photorefraction with Spot Vision Screener versus Visual Acuity Testing as Community-Based Preschool Vision Screening at the Age of 3.5 Years in Japan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of a photoscreener in identifying undiagnosed unilateral amblyopia at vision screening of 3-year-old children in Japan.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Refractive errors and risk factors for myopia in infants aged 1-18 months in Tianjin, China.BMC ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Effectiveness of the Spot Vision Screener in screening 3-year-old children with potential amblyopia in Japan.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Birth weight and refractive state measured by Spot Vision Screener in children aged 40 months.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spot Vision Screener (SVS) can conduct refraction tests for both eyes within a short period. This study aims to evaluate the refraction and pupil diameters of 3-year- and 1-month-old Japanese children using SVS in regular medical checkup. We examined 2438 eyes of 1219 children (age: 3-year- and 1-month) in Fujieda (Shizuoka, Japan) to assess their refraction and pupil diameters and eye-position screening conducted by SVS. SVS successfully measured 1217 children (99.8%). Regarding the right eye refraction, the spherical power was +0.70 ± 0.55 D (median, +0.75 D), and the cylindrical power was -0.67 ± 0.49 D (median, -0.50 D). The pupil diameter of the right eyes was 5.57 ± 0.79 (median, 5.60) mm. we could obtain a large number of basic data for 3-year- and 1-month-old Japanese children. However, refraction and pupil diameter of children were not normally distributed, so careful handling of children's basic data on the eye is necessary.
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.