ArticleInternational ophthalmology2022
The effect of education seminars on pediatric vision screening in the primary care settings.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe primary aim of this study was to assess the practice behaviors of physicians on pediatric vision screening (VS) in primary care settings in Turkey and compare the groups in respect of previous education on VS.
methodsAll physicians working in the primary care settings of Kayseri province of Turkey were directly administered a 24-item questionnaire at planned education seminars. The groups were compared according to a history of VS education (Group 1) and no history of VS education (Group 2). The self-reported questionnaire results were analyzed statistically.
resultsA total of 124 of 453 physicians completed the survey with a response rate of 27.3%. VS was reported to be performed as recommended by 70.2% of the participants. The physicians in Group 1 were significantly older (P < 0.05) and more experienced (P < 0.05) than those in Group 2. Group 1 performed the red reflex (RR) test significantly more frequently (P < 0.05) and referred the patients to an ophthalmologist less frequently than Group 2 (P < 0.05). Regression analysis revealed that age (P < 0.05) and previous education (P < 0.05) were the independent factors for visual acuity and RR testing, respectively. Practice-related factors were the most commonly reported barriers to VS in primary care settings.
conclusionAlthough there is a high rate of reported full adherence to the recommendations for pediatric VS, it seems to be more likely to be performed insufficiently. Practice-related barriers should be handled by publicly available education materials (e.g., YouTube videos). VS education should be added at an earlier stage of medical training programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34609668What 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.