ArticlePloS one2021
Amblyopia risk factors among pediatric patients in a hospital-based setting using photoscreening.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors influencing refractive status distribution and amblyopia in preschool children with low vision.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Referral rate for refractive amblyopia using automated vision screening in school children in Beirut, Lebanon.PloS one · 2025Article
- Comparison of photorefraction by Plusoptix A12 and cycloplegic autorefraction in children.BMC ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Comparative Validation of PlusoptiX and AI-Optic Photoscreeners in Children with High Amblyopia Risk Factor Prevalence.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of our study was to determine the prevalence of amblyopia risk factors in children visiting the American University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC) using automated vision screening.
methodsThis was a hospital-based screening of 1102 children aged between 2 and 6 years. Vision screening was performed using PlusoptiX S12 over 2 years (2018-2020). The need for referral to a pediatric ophthalmologist was based on the amblyopia risk factors set forth by the American Association for Pediatric Ophthalmology and Strabismus. Referred patients underwent a comprehensive eye examination.
resultsA total of 1102 children were screened, 63 were referred for amblyopia risk factors (5.7%); 37/63 (59%) underwent comprehensive eye examination and 73% were prescribed glasses. Of the non-referred group of children, 6.35% had astigmatism, 6.25% were hyperopic and 3.27% were myopic. The refractive errors observed among the examined patients were distributed as follows: 41% astigmatism, 51% hyperopia, and 8% myopia; amblyopia was not detected. Refractive amblyopia risk factors were associated with the presence of systemic disorders. Bland-Altman plots showed most of the differences to be within limits of agreement.
conclusionUsing an automated vision screener in a hospital-based cohort of children aged 2 to 6 years, the rate of refractive amblyopia risk factors was 5.7%. Hyperopia was the most commonly encountered refractive error and children with systemic disorders were at higher risk.
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.