ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2023
Childhood cerebral visual impairment subtype classification based on an extensive versus a limited test battery.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Closing in on a Consensus in Identifying, Assessing and Diagnosing Children With Cerebral Visual Impairment.Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2025Review
- Cerebral/Cortical Visual Impairment Classification and Categorization Using Eye Tracking Measures of Oculomotor Function.Ophthalmology scienceArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To classify CVI subtypes and compare the added value of an extensive test battery over a limited test battery in subtype classification of cerebral visual impairment (CVI) in children. Methods: Seventy-five children with a clinical diagnosis of CVI (median [IQR] age: 9 [7-12] years) were identified from the medical records. The extensive test battery included visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, ocular alignment, eye movement analysis, visual field analysis, optic nerve head evaluation, and evaluation of visual perception. The limited test battery included visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, ocular alignment, and evaluation of visual perception. Principal component analysis (PCA) followed by cluster analysis was done, for both test batteries separately, to determine the optimum subtype classification for CVI. Results: Fifty-one participants with an extensive test battery with mild to moderate visual impairment were included in the main analysis. This resulted in four CVI subtypes for the extensive test battery (subtle characteristics, higher-level visual function deficits, lower-level visual function deficits, and higher- and lower- level visual function deficits) and three CVI subtypes for the limited test battery (subtle characteristics, higher-level visual function deficits, and higher- and lower- level visual function deficits). There were significant differences between the subtypes for 9 out of 10 measures of the extensive and all 4 measures of the limited test battery ( Conclusion: This data-driven study has provided meaningful CVI subtype classifications based on the outcomes of various key functional and structural measures in CVI diagnosis. Comparison of the extensive test battery to the limited test battery revealed the added value of an extensive test battery in classifying CVI. The outcomes of this study, therefore, have provided a new direction in the area of CVI classification.
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.