Trial reportBioMed research international2020
Evaluation of a Novel Quality of Life Scale for Schoolchildren with Nonstrabismic Binocular Vision Anomalies.
Trial report in BioMed research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retracted: Evaluation of a Novel Quality of Life Scale for Schoolchildren with Nonstrabismic Binocular Vision Anomalies.BioMed research international · 2024Article
- Influence of feedforward control-based health education intervention on compliance, visual function and self-perceived burden among patients with diabetic retinopathy.African health sciences · 2023Article
- A Comparative Study to Assess the Accommodation and Vergence Relationship of Myopia in Indian Adolescent.Ethiopian journal of health sciences · 2023Article
- Validation of the Symptom Questionnaire for Visual Dysfunctions (SQVD): A Questionnaire to Evaluate Symptoms of any Type of Visual Dysfunctions.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2024-03-20Computer-Aided Content or Computer-Generated Content · Concerns/Issues about Data · Concerns/Issues about Referencing/Attributions · Concerns/Issues about Results and/or Conclusions · Concerns/Issues about Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Paper Mill · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe professional Quality of Life Scale (QLS) can provide a valuable reference for the diagnosis of visual function anomalies. In the present study, we aimed to design a novel QLS to specially quantify the life quality of schoolchildren with nonstrabismic binocular vision anomalies (NSBVAs) in China.
methodsThe novel QLS, named QOL-CVF20, was established based on classical vision-related scales and the administration of the questionnaire to 116 schoolchildren with NSBVAs and 100 healthy schoolchildren in China. The diagnostic reference value between QOL-CVF20 and VF-14 was evaluated on the questionnaires to 240 schoolchildren with NSBVAs and 238 healthy schoolchildren.
resultsAll the subjects could complete the QOL-CVF20 questionnaires independently. QOL-CVF20 had good structural validity, content validity, and discriminant validity, when it was applied in Chinese schoolchildren. The average score of the NSBVA group was significantly lower than that of the control group (49.0 ± 6.9 vs. 69.7 ± 6.7, respectively;
conclusionsQOL-CVF20 could quantify the life quality of schoolchildren with NSBVAs and might be served as a valuable reference for early diagnosis and clinical evaluation of NSBVAs.
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.