ArticleSaudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society
Amblyogenic risk factors and validity of vision screening using spot-screener among kindergarten children in Qassim region, Saudi Arabia.
Article in Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Application of spot vision screening combined with axial length measurement for early identification of myopia risk in Chinese Young children.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Eye Health Awareness and School-Based Screening in Saudi Schools: A Systematic Literature Review.Clinical optometry · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of the study was to present the outcomes of vision and amblyogenic risk factor (ARF) screening in kindergarten children in the Qassim region, Saudi Arabia.
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, an optometrist conducted first-level screening in a kindergarten using a spot screener (Welch Allyn) in 2023. Refractive status and ocular alignment were evaluated. The visual acuity of each eye was measured. Those who failed the first screening or had impaired vision were re-evaluated at the second level of screening by an optometrist and pediatric ophthalmologist. Those who failed the screening in Kindergarten were referred to a pediatric ophthalmology clinic for confirmation and management (third level of screening).
resultsWe screened 222 children (mean age: 5.9 ± 0.4 years, 111 boys). A total of 59 (26.6%) children failed the spot vision screening test. A vision screening test by an optometrist identified 58 (26.1%) children with impaired vision. Refractive errors (REs) for children who failed the spot screener included hyperopia in 4 (6.7%) children, high myopia (>6.00 D) in 2 (3.4%) children, and astigmatism in 53 (89.83%) children. Compared to the evaluation by optometrists and pediatric ophthalmologists at KGs, spot screening had 0.845 sensitivity and 0.939 specificity. Validity parameters differed for RE, vision impairment, amblyopia, and strabismus. Seventy-one (31.98%) children were referred for third-level screening, but only 32 (44.4%) children attended, and among them, the prevalence of amblyopia was 25%.
conclusionThe high prevalence of amblyopia and undetected ARFs necessitate establishing annual vision screening among 3- to 5-year-old children in the study area.
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.