ReviewIndian journal of ophthalmology2021
Clinical profile and error of inclusion and exclusion in schools for the blind in Bangalore and a review of literature.
Review in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2021. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Commentary: Blindness, schools for the blind: Our scenario!Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Changing Trends in Childhood Blindness in Schools for the Visually Impaired in India: A Structured Literature Review.Journal of current ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To determine the causes of severe visual impairment and blindness in children in schools for the blind in the city of Bangalore, Karnataka and to determine the error of inclusion and exclusion from these schools. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study. Children in four schools for the blind were subjected to a detailed ophthalmic evaluation. The World Health Organization Program for Prevention of Blindness low-vision form was used to collect data. To know the educational background of children with visual disability of 40% or more (best-corrected visual acuity of ≤6/24 in the better eye), not in schools for the blind, we collected data by telephonic conversation after procuring their phone numbers from our low-vision clinic. Results: One-hundred-seventy-eight children were examined. The major site of anomaly causing blindness in 31% of children was optic nerve, followed by retina (24%), cornea (23%), and whole globe (22%). Avoidable blindness was 35.42%. Thirteen percent of the children with no visual disability were incorrectly enrolled in blind schools. We were able to contact 92 children with a visual disability of ≥40%. Seventy-eight children (84.78%) attended regular schools; these schools were bereft of a specially trained teacher to look after the needs of the blind. Conclusion: Avoidable blindness is still a cause for concern. Children should undergo eye-examination before being enrolled in schools for the blind to avoid errors of inclusion. Though integrated education for children with vision disability is a good approach, it requires teachers trained in teaching skills particular to blindness. Education for the visually impaired in India needs a major revision.
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.