ArticleBMC ophthalmology2024
Prescribing patterns for hyperopia: an insight of the optometrist perspective and practice.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 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.
- Article
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
backgroundTo investigate the current prescribing patterns for correcting hyperopia among optometrists in clinical practice in Saudi Arabia and compare those to current international guidelines. And explore the factors that influence practitioners' prescribing decision.
methodThis cross-sectional study employed 30 items online survey that encompass demographic data, current practice and cycloplegia use, numerical response to indicate the minimum level of hyperopia at which optometrists would consider prescribing spectacles to non-strabismic children and determine the diopter value required for prescribing correction for hyperopia if present with other factors.
resultA total of 104 optometrists responded to the survey (52 females and 52 males). They recruited from 35 cities across Saudi Arabia. Out of total, 44% of them considered cycloplegic refraction essential under 12 years and 56% of them extended the range to 18 years. Large variation were found between the optometrists' responses and current guideline recommendations. Several factors influenced the decision-making of the practicing optometrist including signs and symptoms, bilateral hyperopia, average dioptric value, reading difficulty, and accommodative function.
conclusionThere are some matches between the international guidelines and the practice patterns that followed by optometrists in Saudi Arabia, however, the optometrists did not report that they are following them purposefully. These findings highlight the need to improve optometrists' practice about spectacle prescription in pediatric population.
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.