Trial reportOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2025
Objective evaluation of fusional vergence after a vision therapy protocol in typical binocular vision.
Trial report in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Exercise and visual training interventions for myopia in children and adolescents: a systematic review with a focus on near-far accommodation.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Objective evaluation of fusional vergence after a vision therapy protocol in typical binocular vision.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025Trial
- Analysis of Saccade Characteristics During Fusional Vergence Tests in Normal Binocular Vision Participants.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Article
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
Abstract
introductionVision therapy is an effective treatment option for binocular vision and accommodative anomalies. However, its effect on typical binocular vision is less documented. The aim of this study was to evaluate objectively the change in near fusional vergence amplitudes in adults with typical binocular vision after performing a vision therapy protocol.
methodsThirty-four adults were randomly classified into an experimental group (EG), who underwent a vision therapy protocol for 12 weeks, and a control group (CG), who received a placebo treatment for 12 weeks (Phase 1). In Phase 2, the CG performed the same therapy protocol as the EG. Fusional vergence amplitudes were measured objectively in a haploscopic set-up using smooth and step fusional vergence tests. The break points of positive and negative fusional vergence (PFV and NFV, respectively) were determined using a custom algorithm.
resultsAfter Phase 1, there were no significant differences between the groups for fusional vergences. After Phase 2, PFV and NFV increased significantly as measured with the smooth and step tests (p = 0.002 and p < 0.001 for NFV and p = 0.03 and p = 0.02 for PFV, respectively). These improvements were maintained after 1 month without any further intervention (all p > 0.05).
conclusionBased on these results, clinicians should consider that the vergence system cannot be trained beyond 2 and 5 Δ for NFV and PFV, respectively, when aiming to enhance vergence skills with vision therapy in patients without binocular dysfunctions.
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.