ArticleInternational ophthalmology2020
The assistance of electronic visual aids with perceptual learning for the improvement in visual acuity in visually impaired children.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Add-on perceptual learning on refractive amblyopia in children.International journal of ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Modeling Reactive Oxygen Species-Induced Axonal Loss in Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy.Biomolecules · 2022Article
- Viewing Strategies in Children With Visual Impairment and Children With Normal Vision: A Systematic Scoping Review.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the effect of electronic visual aids (EVA) combined with perceptual learning (PL) for the improvement in visual acuity for moderate to severe visually impaired and blind children.
methodsTwenty-eight 6- to 14-year-old visually impaired children (19 boys and 9 girls) were divided into two groups: PL under the assistance of EVA (Group A, 14 children) and simple PL without EVA (Group B, 14 children). The content of PL was to search the inversed "E" in the crowding strings and connected with lines, 30 minutes a day for 6 months. EVA can provide 5-10 times magnification on the 4.3-inch screen. Uncorrected distance visual acuity (UCVA), best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), near visual acuity (NVA) and refractive error were evaluated before and 3 and 6 months after training.
resultsBaseline UCVA, BCVA or NVA was comparable between the two groups. Three months after training, UCVA, BCVA and NVA improved significantly in Group A (p < 0.05). At the end of training, UCVA and BCVA continued progressing in Group A compared to 3 months (p = 0.01, 0.02), but visual acuity did not show significant improvement in Group B during the same time, except that UCVA improved at the first follow-up. Refractive error had no significant change post-training in both groups.
conclusionsVisually impaired children can benefit more from the combination of PL with EVA than simple PL, and the improvement in visual acuity accompanied no significant myopic shift. It may provide a new method of treatment and rehabilitation in visually impaired children.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31916056What 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.