Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35886507›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Photorefraction with Spot Vision Screener versus Visual Acuity Testing as Community-Based Preschool Vision Screening at the Age of 3.5 Years in Japan.

Toshihiko Matsuo, Chie Matsuo, Masami Kayano, Aya Mitsufuji, Chiyori Satou, Hiroaki Matsuoka

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Toshihiko MatsuoGraduate School of Interdisciplinary Science and Engineering in Health Systems, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-6570-0030
Chie MatsuoGraduate School of Interdisciplinary Science and Engineering in Health Systems, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan.
Masami KayanoOkayama City Government Health Office, Okayama 700-8546, Japan.
Aya MitsufujiOkayama City Government Health Office, Okayama 700-8546, Japan.
Chiyori SatouOkayama City Government Health Office, Okayama 700-8546, Japan.
Hiroaki MatsuokaOkayama City Government Health Office, Okayama 700-8546, Japan.
Okayama Prefecture · JPOkayama University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nationwide in Japan, a community-based vision-screening program in 3.5-year-old children is conducted in three steps: questionnaires and home visual acuity testing as the primary screening; visual acuity testing by nurses and pediatricians' inspection in community health centers as the secondary screening; and examinations by ophthalmologists as the tertiary screening. In this study, we introduced photorefraction with a Spot vision screener in addition to visual acuity testing to answer the clinical question of whether photorefraction could better detect eye diseases and potentially replace visual acuity testing. Photorefraction was performed on 813 consecutive 3.5-year-old children in a center. The children were sent to tertiary examinations, which were based on the Spot vision screener standard, in addition to the visual acuity testing standard: failure in either eye to pass 0.5 visual acuity in a center. A notice to visit ophthalmologists was issued for 95 children (11%), and documents with the diagnosis were sent back to the Heath Office for 76 children (80%). The rate of children with anisometropic or ametropic amblyopia or accommodative esotropia as treatment-requiring diseases was highest in cases of no pass at both standards (10/15 = 66%), and higher in cases of no pass only at the Spot vision screener standard (13/45 = 28%), compared with cases of no pass only at the visual acuity testing standard (6/33 = 18%,

Indexed as

AmblyopiaStrabismusVision ScreeningChild, PreschoolHumansJapanVisual Acuity3.5-year-old childrenamblyopiacommunity health centernursephotorefractionpreschool vision-screening programrefractive errorSpot vision screenerstrabismusvisual acuity test

Identifiers

PMID35886507
PMCPMC9321534
OpenAlexW4285732547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.