ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Differences in the Visual Performances of Patients with Strabismus, Amblyopia, and Healthy Controls.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in Ophthalmic Engineering-Integrating Biomechanics, Tissue Engineering, and Imaging for the Future of Vision Science.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Altered Resting-State Brain Activity and Functional Connectivity in Post-Stroke Apathy: An fMRI Study.Brain sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to use the new definition of amblyopia and to define the overall visual performance of healthy controls (HCs), patients with strabismus (PS), and patients with refractive amblyopia (PRA), based on the interaction of selected visual abilities.
methodA total of 398 participants were divided in three groups: HCs, PRA, and PS. Variables such as visual acuity, refractive state, degree of stereopsis, phoria state, magnitude, and type of deviation were analyzed using parametric and non-parametric tests.
resultsBinocular visual acuity at near is the unique predictor factor for stereopsis in PRA and PS, while age relates to the amount of binocular visual acuity at near, only for PS with stereopsis. Binocular visual acuity at near and phoria states relate to each other in PRA. Binocular visual acuity at near and far in PS is better than PRA, with no differences in the degree of stereopsis. Stereoblind patients were only found among PS (36%). Only (44.9%) of PS had amblyopia. Exophoria predominated among PRA (69.72%) and HCs (78.87%), while exotropia was the predominant deviation in PS (60.54%). Hyperopia was the predominate refractive error among the groups, HCs (74.65%), PRA (79.82%), and PS (59.85%), followed by astigmatism.
interpretationHCs perform better than PS and PRA. The visual performance of PS with stereopsis and PRA is similar. Binocular visual acuity at near can predict the degree of stereopsis, and stereoblind patients are exclusively related to strabismus.
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.