Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38214688›Full record

Trial reportTranslational vision science & technology2024

Outcomes of Telerehabilitation Versus In-Office Training With Magnification Devices for Low Vision: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Ava K Bittner, John E Kaminski, Patrick D Yoshinaga, John D Shepherd, Tiffany L Chan, Alexis G Malkin, Ashley Deemer, Micaela Gobeille, Stacy J Thoene, Annemarie Rossi and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Translational vision science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04066075 (Beacon Sensors & Telerehabilitation to Assess & Improve Use of Devices for Visual Functioning), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT04066075 nacompletednot on this map

Beacon Sensors & Telerehabilitation to Assess & Improve Use of Devices for Visual Functioning

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, Los AngelesRan2019 to 2023Enrolled61ConditionsLow VisionArmsLow Vision Rehabilitation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Exploring the Writing and Typing Needs of Older Adults with Acquired Vision Loss: A Qualitative Study of Challenges and Adaptive Strategies.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Article
  3. Recent Developments in Research to Make the World Better for People with Low Vision.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Ava K BittnerUniversity of California, Los Angeles, Department of Ophthalmology, Stein Eye Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
John E KaminskiMid-Michigan Eye Care, Midland, MI, USA.
Patrick D YoshinagaMarshall B. Ketchum University, Southern California College of Optometry, Fullerton, CA, USA.
John D ShepherdUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Truhlsen Eye Institute, Weigel Williamson Center for Visual Rehabilitation, Omaha, NE, USA.
Tiffany L ChanChan Family Optometry, Grass Valley, CA, USA.
Alexis G MalkinNew England College of Optometry, Boston, MA, USA.
Ashley DeemerMarshall B. Ketchum University, Southern California College of Optometry, Fullerton, CA, USA.
Micaela GobeilleNew England College of Optometry, Boston, MA, USA.
Stacy J ThoeneUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Truhlsen Eye Institute, Weigel Williamson Center for Visual Rehabilitation, Omaha, NE, USA.
Annemarie RossiFrank Stein & Paul S. May Center for Low Vision Rehabilitation, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Nicole C RossNew England College of Optometry, Boston, MA, USA.
BeST-AID Study Team
New England College of Optometry · USMarshall B. Ketchum University · USMay Institute · USUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center · USEye Care Associates · USUniversity of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

Beacon Sensors and Telerehabilitation to Assess and Improve use of Devices (BeST-AID) for Low VisionR01EY034627 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI AVA K BITTNER · 2023 to 2026
$1.7M
Beacon Sensors and Telerehabilitation to Assess and Improve use of Devices for visual functioning (BeST-AID)R21EY029883 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI BITTNER, AVA K · 2019 to 2020
$470k
NEI NIH HHS R21 EY029883
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: An evidence basis is lacking but needed to compare reading ability outcomes after magnification device training remotely via telerehabilitation versus in office. Methods: A multicenter randomized controlled trial at academic centers and vision rehabilitation private practices randomized 61 visually impaired adults to telerehabilitation or in-office training 1 to 4 months after dispensing new portable electronic, hand-held, or stand optical magnifiers. Telerehabilitation included loaner equipment for Zoom videoconferencing with remote control access software. Using a multilevel regression model, changes in Activity Inventory responses using Rasch analysis estimated reading ability in dimensionless log odds units (logits) (0.14-logit change corresponds with ability change expected from a one-line change in visual acuity). Results: Across 47 participants who completed the trial, reading ability with new magnifiers improved significantly by 0.61 logits on average (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.86; P < 0.001) from baseline to 1 month, and by an additional 0.44 logits on average (95% CI, 0.19-0.69; P < 0.001) from 1 to 4months (i.e., after magnifier training), with very similar significant findings for both telerehabilitation (n = 29; mean improvement = 0.44 logits; 95% CI, 0.08-0.80; P = 0.018) and in-office training (n = 18; mean improvement = 0.43 logits; 95% CI, 0.15-0.71; P = .003), and no significant difference between randomized groups across both follow-ups (95% CI, -0.43 to 0.61; P = .73). Vision, demographics, and health factors were nonsignificantly related to reading ability changes from 1 to 4 months. Conclusions: Reading ability improved after the provision of newly dispensed magnifiers, with further improvements following additional magnifier training via either telerehabilitation or in-office usual care. Translational Relevance: These findings provide support for the use of telerehabilitation to enhance reading ability with newly prescribed magnifiers as an alternative modality of care delivery.

Indexed as

TelerehabilitationVision, LowActivities of Daily LivingAdultHumansReadingVisual Acuity

Identifiers

PMID38214688
PMCPMC10790671
OpenAlexW4390794957

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.