ArticleMedicine2020
Comparison between distance and near visual acuity in amblyopes.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Design and Validation of a Novel Smartphone-Based Visual Acuity Test: The K-VA Test.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- Comparison of Visual Acuity Measurement Using Three Methods: Standard ETDRS Chart, Near Chart and a Smartphone-Based Eye Chart Application.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare distant visual acuity (DVA) and near visual acuity (NVA) in amblyopia and evaluate if NVA can be used to diagnose amblyopia.A retrospective study was performed on 73 patients diagnosed with amblyopia based on DVA, by measuring their NVA and comparing the DVA and NVA. The NVA was measured by Snellen chart at 30 cm and the DVA was measured by Dr Hahn vision test chart at 5m. The patients' age, type of amblyopia, spherical equivalent, the difference between spherical equivalent and the fellow eye spherical equivalent spherical, and prism diopter (PD) were evaluated and their relationship with the difference between the DVA and NVA was analyzed.The NVA was significantly better than the DVA in amblyopia (P = .000). The difference between the DVA and NVA was not significantly related to the type of amblyopia (P = .600) or the patients' age(P = .351). Also, the difference between the DVA and NVA was not significantly affected by the spherical equivalent (P = .425) or the difference between spherical equivalent and the fellow eye spherical equivalent (P = .212) in anisometropia amblyopia, and also not by the PD (P = .882) in strabismus amblyopia.In amblyopes, the NVA was better than the DVA before amblyopia treatment. The difference between the DVA and NVA was not affected by age, type of amblyopia, spherical equivalent, the difference between spherical equivalent and the fellow eye spherical equivalent spherical, or PD. Therefore, it should be taken into consideration that NVA could underestimate the severity of amblyopia and affect the accuracy at diagnosing amblyopia.
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.