Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37596579›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2023

The impact of spectacle correction on the well-being of children with vision impairment due to uncorrected refractive error: a systematic review.

Govender-Poonsamy Pirindhavellie, Ai Chee Yong, Khathutshelo Percy Mashige, Kovin S Naidoo, Ving Fai Chan

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
9.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Govender-Poonsamy PirindhavellieUniversity of KwaZulu Natal, College of Health Sciences, Private Bag X54001, Durban, 4000, South Africa.
Ai Chee YongQueens University Belfast, University Rd, Belfast, BT7 1NN, UK.
Khathutshelo Percy MashigeUniversity of KwaZulu Natal, College of Health Sciences, Private Bag X54001, Durban, 4000, South Africa.
Kovin S NaidooUniversity of KwaZulu Natal, College of Health Sciences, Private Bag X54001, Durban, 4000, South Africa.
Ving Fai ChanUniversity of KwaZulu Natal, College of Health Sciences, Private Bag X54001, Durban, 4000, South Africa. v.chan@qub.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4968-7953
University of KwaZulu-Natal · ZAQueen's University Belfast · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite being easily corrected with eyeglasses, over two-thirds of the world's child population presents with vision impairment (VI) due to uncorrected refractive errors. While systematic reviews have shown that VI can significantly impact children's depression and anxiety, none have reviewed the existing literature on the association between spectacle correction and well-being. This review aims to address this knowledge gap.

main outcome measuresThe main outcome measures were i) cognitive and education well-being which included mathematics and english literacy, reading fluency, school function, academic performance and grades; ii) psychological and mental health well-being which included physical anxiety, learning anxiety and mental health test scores and iii) quality of life.

methodsWe searched eight databases for articles published between 1999 to 2021 that assessed the associations between spectacle correction and children's (0 to 18 years) well-being. There were no restrictions on language or geographic location. Two reviewers independently screened all publications using validated quality checklists. The findings of the review were analysed using narrative synthesis. [PROSPERO CRD42020196847].

resultsOf 692 records found in the databases, six randomised control trials, one cohort, one cross-sectional and one qualitative study (N = 9, 1.3%) were eligible for analysis. Data were collected from 25 522 children, 20 parents and 25 teachers across the nine studies. Seven were rated as good quality (67 to 100% of quality criteria fulfilled), and two were satisfactory (33 to 66% of quality criteria fulfilled). Spectacle correction was found to improve children's educational well-being (n = 4 very strong evidence; n = 2 strong evidence), quality of life (n = 1, very strong evidence) and decrease anxiety and increase mental health scores (n = 1, strong evidence).

conclusionEvidence suggests that spectacle correction improves children's cognitive and educational well-being, psychological well-being, mental health, and quality of life. More research is needed, given the paucity of published literature and the focus on only three aspects of well-being.

Indexed as

EyeglassesQuality of LifeAnxietyChildCross-Sectional StudiesEducational StatusHumansChildrenSpectacle correctionUncorrected refractive errorVision impairmentWell-being

Identifiers

PMID37596579
PMCPMC10436410
OpenAlexW4385985744

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.