ArticleBMJ open2026
Adolescents' perspectives on spectacle wear and adherence following a school-based outreach programme in Indonesia: a qualitative study.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study is to explore in depth adolescents' insights regarding experiences of spectacle lens wear and its correlation with self-perception, quality of life, social interactions, adherence and barriers.
designQualitative design through individual interviews and thematic analysis.
settingMiddle school students in five regions of Jakarta Province.
participants31 middle school adolescents who participated and received free spectacle wear by the Indonesian Ophthalmologist Association.
methodsA set of semistructured questionnaires exploring adolescents' perception regarding spectacle lens wear, adapted from the PedEyeQ. Interviews were conducted on site or through Zoom and were then transcribed.
findingsThematic analysis identified three themes, as follows: (1) experience with eyeglasses, (2) motivation and encouragement and (3) barriers to usage. This study found that more than half of adolescents received their first spectacles during the outreach programme, with most reporting improved vision and academic performance after spectacle wear. However, adherence varied, as some participants-particularly those with moderate to high myopia and astigmatism-did not use their new glasses due to discomfort, poor fit or dissatisfaction with visual clarity. While initial adaptation often involved dizziness or soreness, most adjusted within a week. The majority recognised the importance of spectacle wear, describing clearer vision, reduced eye strain and improved confidence, though a minority viewed it as unnecessary. Parents played a central role in influencing health-seeking behaviour, and limited prior access to eye examinations and geographic challenges restricted care for several adolescents. Financial concerns were reported by a small proportion, while psychological barriers such as fear of teasing or negative self-perception were the major barrier. Overall, adolescents highlighted both the benefits and challenges of spectacle wear, with motivation shaped by personal experience, parental influence and accessibility of eye care services.
conclusionsFindings showed insight that adolescent understanding regarding eye health is imperative to support adherence. However, psychological barriers act as a major factor that impedes lens wear. Involving parents and teachers in understanding urgency and severity of eye health in adolescents, specifically refractive error and its long-term negative impact, as well as the prominent psychological barriers, may improve adolescent perception and adherence.
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.