ArticlePeerJ2024
Successful treatment of diplopia using prism correction combined with vision therapy/orthoptics improves health-related quality of life.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. 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.
- Visual Impairment and Driving in Older Adults: A Narrative Review.Current treatment options in neurology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To track improvement in diplopia symptoms with strabismus-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaire across a treatment consisting of prism correction followed by vision therapy/orthoptics when prism treatment alone has not succeeded. Methods: Forty-eight participants with diplopia and a mean age of 62.45 were asked to complete an Adult Strabismus-20 (AS-20) questionnaire and a Diplopia Questionnaire (DQ) before and after prism correction. Inclusion criteria were diplopia reported on the DQ as "sometimes", "often" or "always" at reading or straight-ahead distance. The prism correction was classified as successful if the participant reported "never" or "rarely" on the DQ for reading and straight-ahead distance; and unsuccessful if the perceived diplopia worsened or remained the same. For all participants, mean initial AS-20 scores were compared with mean post-prism correction scores, taking into account AS-20 subscales (reading and general functions, and self-perception and interaction). Participants in the failed prism treatment subgroup subsequently underwent a programme of vision therapy wearing their prism correction, the results of which were again determined by participants' responses on the AS-20 questionnaire, completed before and after the vision therapy. Results: Five of the 48 participants dropped out of the study. Prism correction was classified as successful in 22 of 43 participants (51%), and unsuccessful in 21 (49%). Those participants for whom the prism correction was classified as a success showed a statistically significant improvement ( Conclusions: Although effective prism correction of diplopia is correlated with enhanced HRQOL, prism correction alone is frequently not sufficient to achieve this objective. In these cases, vision therapy/orthoptics treatment as a coadjutant to prism correction is shown to improve HRQOL.
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.