ArticleOptometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry2025
Vision corrections used by presbyopic orienteers.
Article in Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry, 2025. 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.
- Presbyopia: Current Perspectives and Prospects for Patients.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
significanceEvaluating the visual challenges and refractive correction solutions of presbyopic orienteers identifies features of relevance to optometric management of the visual needs of active presbyopes. PURPOSE: Orienteering is a unique sport requiring visual clarity at a range of viewing distances and has a high proportion of presbyopic participants. This study evaluates the vision corrections used by presbyopic orienteers, specifically aiming to characterize the prevalence of different vision correction options used and to explore the strengths and limitations of different vision correction solutions.
methodsOrienteers 40 years or older completed an online questionnaire consisting of multiple-choice questions covering personal demographics, orienteering participation, and visual corrections worn in everyday life and for orienteering. Free-text questions asked for further information about the corrections used and advice received from eye care practitioners were analyzed using content analysis.
resultsThere were 469 respondents (195 women, 274 men; median age category, 55 to 59 years). For the 187 people without distance refractive correction, the most frequent corrections for orienteering were "off the shelf" reading spectacles (n = 95) or use of a compass magnifier (n = 24), and for the 277 people with distance refractive correction, they were progressive addition spectacles (n = 96) and monovision contact lenses (n = 63). The main visual challenges faced by orienteers were seeing map detail, lens obstruction from fogging and rain, and difficulty orienteering in low light in the daytime. An ideal correction needed to provide visual clarity for both map and terrain. No visual correction type consistently addressed all challenges. Orienteers valued personalized discussion with eye care practitioners to address their needs.
conclusionsOptimal visual corrections for presbyopic orienteers are individual, but higher reading additions to clarify map detail, contact lenses to avoid lens obstruction, additional light, and solutions that provide clear vision at all viewing distances while avoiding the reading add blurring the ground at the orienteer's feet should be considered. Personalized care is necessary to optimize visual correction solutions.
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.