ArticleActa ophthalmologica2022
Effectiveness of routine population-wide orthoptic preschool vision screening tests at age 6-24 months in the Netherlands.
Article in Acta ophthalmologica, 2022. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the effectiveness of visual acuity measurements for amblyopia screening at the age of 36 and 45 months and difference in severity of amblyopia detected.Acta ophthalmologica · 2025Article
- The cost-effectiveness of different visual acuity screening strategies in three European countries: A microsimulation study.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- A Comprehensive Overview of Vision Screening Programmes across 46 Countries.The British and Irish orthoptic journal · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe effectiveness of preverbal orthoptic tests at age 6, 9, 14 and 24 months in population-wide screening was assessed.
methodsTwo consecutive birth cohorts at 134 centres were compared. At general health screening visits, children born July-December 2011 were vision screened four times between 6 and 24 months with inspection, pupillary reflexes, eye motility, Hirschberg, cover test and monocular pursuit. Children born January-June 2012 were vision screened at general screening visits only in case of visually apparent abnormalities or positive family history. After referral, cause and severity of amblyopia were determined. Visual acuity was measured in all children at 36 and 45 months.
resultsThe control and intervention group comprised 5649 versus 5162 children. Amblyopia was diagnosed in 185 (3.3%) versus 159 children (3.1%), outside of screening in 21 (11.4%) versus 25 (15.7%). Between 6 and 24 months, 44 (23.8%) versus 27 (17%) (RR = 0.67 [95% CI 0.42, 1.09]) were referred and after visual acuity (VA) measurement 120 (64.9%) versus 107 (67.3%). Of 109 versus 108 children with refractive or bilateral amblyopia, 94 (86.2%) versus 92 (85.2%) were detected with VA measurements. Visual acuity of the amblyopic eye, after referral, was not significantly different between groups (p 0.896), nor was the time to amblyopia diagnosis (intention to screen [p 0.55]; per protocol [p 0.11]).
conclusionThe effectiveness of vision screening was not influenced by omission of orthoptic tests at general health screening at 6-24 months. Refractive and bilateral amblyopia were almost exclusively found by VA measurements.
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.