ArticleThe British and Irish orthoptic journal2024
Spectrum of Visual Dysfunction Detected by a Novel Testing Protocol Within a Special School Eye Care Service.
Article in The British and Irish orthoptic journal, 2024. 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.
- Vision In SyndrOmic Neurodevelopmental disorders-15q (VISiON-15q) study: eye tracking to supplement clinical examination for detection of cerebral/cortical visual impairment in children with Angelman and Duplication of 15q Syndromes.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- Identification of Suspect-Cerebral Visual Impairment in Children with Special Needs: Moving Towards an Inclusive Diagnostic Process.The British and Irish orthoptic journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Children with special educational needs are more likely to have vision problems than peers in mainstream education. Reports focus on visual acuity and refraction, overlooking visuoperceptual difficulties, including cerebral visual impairment. This article reports on the feasibility and outcomes of visual function testing performed during in-school visual assessments. Method: A retrospective chart review was undertaken of children participating in a special school vision programme. The testing strategy included acuity, fields, contrast sensitivity, eye movements, accommodation, stereopsis, visual attention, refraction and a parent-completed questionnaire. The testing method was chosen based on the child's ability to engage with testing. Results: 78 cases were identified (mean age 9.6 years). Low vision (worse than 6/19) was identified in 31%. All six tests of visual function were completed by 44% (mean 5.1; range 2-6). The mean number of atypical responses was 1 (range 0-4). Almost half (49%) showed at least one atypical response, most commonly visual attention (35%) and 25% had atypical eye movements. Discussion: Overall, only 20% of children in the special school setting demonstrated a normal response to each test they were able to complete. Acuity testing alone does not demonstrate the atypical visual function of a child with special needs. Using techniques which require minimal cognitive, speech or motor function, a range of visual functions can be elicited during in-school testing. This testing strategy has the advantage of demonstrating areas of visual (dys)function impacting on the child's ability to access learning which can be immediately fed back to teaching staff and carers.
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.