ArticleBMC ophthalmology2025
Reading ability in children with intermittent exotropia and its association with binocular visual function and visual information processing capability.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Binocular Vision Anomalies: An Update on Prevalence, Impact, Technological and Treatment Developments and Current Challenges.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Review
- Mean Apparent Propagator MRI: A Potential Imaging Biomarker of Brain Microstructural Alterations in Basic-Type Intermittent Exotropia.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
- Objective Analysis of Reading Ability Using an Eye Tracker in Intermittent Exotropia.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate children's reading performance with intermittent exotropia (IXT) and investigate possible associations among reading abnormalities, binocular visual function, and visual information processing.
methodsThis cross-sectional, case-control study involved 61 children with basic-type IXT and 40 healthy controls aged 7 to 13. Reading performance was assessed objectively using the Development Eye Movement (DEM) test and subjectively with the Dyslexia Checklist for Chinese Children (DCCC). Binocular visual function assessments included fusion, stereopsis, and contrast sensitivity. Visual information processing was evaluated using the Test of Visual Perceptual Skills (TVPS-4) and Beery Visual Motor Integration (VMI-6).
resultsChildren with IXT exhibited significantly poorer performance on both the horizontal (p = 0.04) and vertical subtests (p = 0.048, p = 0.023, p = 0.037 under different viewing conditions) of the DEM test compared to controls. DCCC questionnaire responses indicated greater difficulties among children with IXT in reading, oral language, written expression, reading habits, attention, and vocabulary comprehension (all p < 0.05). Additionally, children with IXT demonstrated significantly reduced stereopsis, fusion, and contrast sensitivity (all p < 0.05). Scores for visual perception (assessed with TVPS-4) and visual-motor integration (assessed with VMI-6) were also lower in the IXT group (p = 0.003 and p = 0.008, respectively). Stepwise multivariate analysis identified visual-motor integration as an independent predictor of DEM reading performance (p = 0.005), accounting for 11% of the variance in reading ability among children with IXT.
conclusionChildren with intermittent exotropia exhibit reduced reading performance, with visual-motor integration possibly as a key factor. Clinical interventions may benefit from focusing on enhancing visual-motor integration.
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.