ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2025
Evaluation of binocular vision parameters as screening indicators for asthenopia.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the feasibility of using binocular vision parameters as relatively objective indicators for screening asthenopia, thereby reducing reliance on subjective questionnaires.
methods50 young Taiwanese adults (mean age: 28.60 ± 4.26 years) were recruited. All participants completed the Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey Questionnaire (CISS-Q) and underwent binocular vision tests, including measurements of negative relative accommodation (NRA), positive relative accommodation (PRA), near point of accommodation (NPA), near point of convergence (NPC), and binocular accommodative facility (BAF). Participants were subsequently assigned into an asthenopia group (n = 26) and a non-asthenopia group (n = 24) based on their CISS-Q scores (post-hoc grouping). Comparisons between groups were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Parameters that showed significant differences were further analyzed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to evaluate the efficacy of binocular vision parameters for screening asthenopia.
resultsSignificant differences were found between the asthenopia and non-asthenopia groups in binocular vision parameters, including NRA, PRA, NPC, and BAF (all p < 0.001). ROC curve analysis and Youden's index revealed that PRA demonstrated the highest screening efficacy (cut point: -2.25 D; sensitivity: 88.5%; specificity: 91.7%), followed by NPC (cut point: 2.25 cm; sensitivity: 84.6%; specificity: 75%) and NRA (cut point: + 1.88 D; sensitivity: 65.4%; specificity: 95.8%).
conclusionThis study proposes the PRA cut point of -2.25D, which exhibits high sensitivity and specificity in asthenopia screening. With further validation, it may serve as a novel indicator in clinical practice. KEY MESSAGES: What is known Asthenopia is primarily assessed using subjective questionnaires, such as the Dry Eye Questionnaire, Computer Vision Syndrome Questionnaire (CVS-Q), and Convergence Insufficiency Symptom Survey Questionnaire (CISS-Q), which may be limited by symptom specificity and subjective responses. What is new Binocular vision parameters may have the potential as relatively objective indicators for screening asthenopia. This study proposes a PRA cut point of -2.25 D, which demonstrates high sensitivity (88.5%) and specificity (91.7%) for screening asthenopia, providing a novel clinical application. PRA is already a component of routine optometric examinations. It can be directly applied in clinical practice without requiring additional equipment or procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40952486What 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.