ArticleBMJ open2020
Validity and feasibility of a self-administered home vision examination in Yueqing, China: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. 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.
- Validation of Home Visual Acuity Tests for Telehealth in the COVID-19 Era.JAMA ophthalmology · 2022Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the validity and feasibility of a self-administered home vision examination programme in China.
designCross-sectional study.
settingYueqing, China.
participantsA two-stage convenience sampling procedure was used to randomly select 600 households from 30 communities participating in the Yueqing Eye Study (YES). The aim of YES is to encourage home-based vision screening, reporting of visual acuity (VA) annually through social media and encouraging people to attend follow-up clinic appointments as a way to improve eye care access for adults with VA ≤+0.5 log of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR).
interventionsHousehold screeners (one per household) who tested other family members' VA completed a questionnaire on family structure, demographic information and knowledge about screening procedures. Other family members then underwent confirmatory VA testing by researchers. OUTCOME MEASURES: The completion rate of home-based VA screening, its sensitivity and specificity were used to evaluate validity. Factors that determined whether families participated in the self-VA screening were used to evaluate feasibility.
results345 (66%) of the 523 (87.2%) households with valid data form their home-based vision examinations also were retested by researchers. There was no statistically significant difference in scores on the family-administerd or researcher-administerd VA test (VA≤+0.5 logMAR, p=0.607; VA >+0.5 logMAR, p=0.612). The sensitivity and specificity of home-based vision screening were 80.5% (95% CI 70.2% to 86.9%) and 95.1% (95% CI 92.6% to 96.8%), respectively. 14.7% (77/523) of tested respondents had VA ≤+0.5 logMAR. Predictors of performing home screening for VA remaining in regression models included higher economic status ('fair and above' vs 'poor': OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.08 to 2.76; p=0.022), age (<45 years vs ≥45 years: OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.85; p=0.014) and living in a nuclear (OR 5.17; 95% CI 2.86 to 9.36; p<0.001) or extended family (OR 8.37; 95% CI 4.93 to 14.20; p<0.001).
conclusionSelf-administered home vision screening is reliable and highly accepted by Chinese adults.
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.