ArticleThe British and Irish orthoptic journal2020
Scottish Pre-School Vision Screening - First 3 Years of National Data.
Article in The British and Irish orthoptic journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Binocular Vision Anomalies in Scotland at Age 3.5-5.5 Years: An Epidemiological Study.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Article
- Increasing myopia in Scotland at age of 3.5-5.5 years: A retrospective epidemiological study.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025Article
- Children with Additional Support Needs Risk Missing Out on Effective Vision Screening: Audit and Survey Considering Attendance Rates and Parent Reported Barriers to Service Access, including Recommendations for Improvement.The British and Irish orthoptic journal · 2025Article
- Retrospective observational cohort study of premature neonates screened for ROP with 7 years of follow-up assessing the visual outcomes and adequacy of preschool visual screening.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2024Observational
- Prevalence of presenting bilateral visual impairment associated with refractive error - findings from the See4School, pre-school vision screening programme in NHS Scotland.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPre-school orthoptic vision screening (POVS) was implemented by the Scottish government and is a standardised assessment to promote early detection of visual problems in children. The target conditions are amblyopia, refractive errors and strabismus. We present the preliminary findings for the first three years of the screening program.
methodsThe data from POVS was collected retrospectively. The data includes screening years 2013 to 2016 inclusive. Data was collected from each health board in Scotland. We report the coverage, referral rate, true positives and positive predictive values.
resultsA total of 167,962 children were due to have vision screening over the 3 screening years included in this paper. This figure does not include the children that opted out of the eye test (mean opt-out rate 1.8%) and children that already attend the hospital eye service (mean already attend rate 3.1%). The POVS program had a mean coverage of 85.5%, ranging from 63.7% to 94.8% between health boards. Over the 3 year screening period, the mean referral rate was found to be 17.9%. The mean true positive rate was 88.9%, and the mean positive predictive value was 86.9%.
conclusionThe Scottish data set on pre-school orthoptic vision screening has shown excellent mean coverage. A consistently high true positive rate over the three screening years demonstrates it is a sensitive screening program, which is essential for the detection of visual problems in children.
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.