Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39052642›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

What choices of visual correction do people make for recreational running?

Keziah Latham, Georgia Dunn, Andrew Morrison, Matthew A Timmis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Vision corrections used by presbyopic orienteers.Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry · 2025
    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

4 authors.

Keziah LathamVision and Hearing Sciences Research Centre, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4060-0006
Georgia DunnCambridge Centre for Sport and Exercise Science, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom.
Andrew MorrisonCambridge Centre for Sport and Exercise Science, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom.
Matthew A TimmisCambridge Centre for Sport and Exercise Science, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRecreational runners who need refractive visual correction will need to choose the type of visual correction (spectacles, contact lenses, or no correction) to wear when running. The prevalence of correction choices and distinguishing demographic features associated with these choices of correction were investigated.

methodsA 26-item online questionnaire covering demographics, running habits, and visual corrections used was answered by 941 people. Participants were aged 18 years or older, considered themselves a recreational runner and reported needing refractive correction for everyday life. Bivariate analyses and binary logistic regression were used to determine the variables independently associated with including or avoiding types of correction for running. RESULTS &

conclusionsParticipants ran an average of 3.8times, 3.6hours, and 33.4km per week. Running habits were not associated with type of visual correction, suggesting that visual correction does not present a barrier to participating in recreational running. Solely using spectacles for running was the most common choice (38.8%) and they were worn for running at least sometimes by 65.8%. Fewer people wore spectacles for running than for general purposes (98.9%), suggesting spectacles have limitations for running. Spectacle wear for running was significantly associated with not having contact lenses available and longer duration of wearing visual correction. Running without correction was a common choice, with 15.5% of the sample only running without correction, and 26.2% running at least sometimes without their visual correction. Not wearing correction was significantly associated with not having contact lenses, a shorter duration of wearing visual correction, and a lower myopic refractive error. Contact lenses were the sole correction for running for 15.6% and were worn for running at least sometimes by 40.5%. Contact lenses were significantly more likely to be used by women and younger runners. Signposting runners to contact lenses if this has not previously been considered is recommended.

Indexed as

EyeglassesRunningAdolescentAdultAgedChoice BehaviorContact LensesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRecreationRefractive ErrorsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39052642
PMCPMC11271955

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.