Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Impact of Teacher Incentive Intervention on Students' Vision Healthcare Uptake: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eye health knowledge, attitude, and practice among special school managers and barriers to eye health programmes in special schools in Hyderabad, India.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Less than one-third of rural Chinese children with refractive error own or wear eyeglasses. To study the effect of teacher incentives on the acceptance of vision care offered to rural students with uncorrected refractive error, we conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial in 18 townships in one county in Shaanxi Province. Primary and junior high schools within each township were assigned to either intervention (all teachers received an incentive) or control (no teacher incentives were offered) groups. A total of 42 schools were assigned to either the intervention group (13 schools) or the control group (29 schools). Teachers in the intervention group could elect to receive high-value (sunglasses worth USD 148), moderate-value (eyeglasses worth USD 89), or cash incentives (USD 35) if ≥70% of eligible students (uncorrected visual acuity (VA) ≤ 6/12 in both eyes and corrected VA ≤ 6/9.5 in both eyes) in the teacher's class visited a program-affiliated vision center (VC) within 60 days after their vision screening. Among 8238 students, 3401 (41.2%, of which 53.0% were girls with a mean age of 12 (SD 1.75)) met the enrollment criteria and were randomly allocated to the intervention (n = 1645, 49.0%) and control groups (n = 1579, 51.0%). Among these, 3224 (94.8%) completed the study and underwent analysis. Nearly equal numbers of students had classroom teachers selecting the high-value (n = 524, 31.9%), moderate-value (n = 582, 35.4%), and cash incentives (n = 539, 32.8%). The rate of the acceptance of offered vision care was significantly higher in the intervention group (382/1645 = 23.2%) compared to the control group (172/1579 = 10.9%, 95% confidence interval for observed difference 12.3%,
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.