Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42658504›Full record

ArticleJAMA ophthalmology2026

HOTV Vision Test Compared With Tumbling E for Pediatric Vision Screening.

Haotian Wu, Yanjiao Wang, Zihan Ni, Yuhe Liu, Zhenglin Liu, Jun Chen, Haidong Zou, Ian G Morgan, Xun Xu, Kathryn A Rose and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05770661 (China Nine Provinces Children Eye Study), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05770661 recruitingnot on this map

China Nine Provinces Children Eye Study

TypeobservationalSponsorShanghai Eye Disease Prevention and Treatment CenterRan2023 to 2026Enrolled30,000ConditionsAxial Length, Myopia, Child Development
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Haotian WuShanghai Eye Diseases Prevention &Treatment Center/Shanghai Eye Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Yanjiao WangShanghai Eye Diseases Prevention &Treatment Center/Shanghai Eye Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Zihan NiShanghai Eye Diseases Prevention &Treatment Center/Shanghai Eye Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Yuhe LiuShanghai Eye Diseases Prevention &Treatment Center/Shanghai Eye Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Zhenglin LiuShanghai Eye Diseases Prevention &Treatment Center/Shanghai Eye Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Jun ChenShanghai Eye Diseases Prevention &Treatment Center/Shanghai Eye Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Haidong ZouShanghai Eye Diseases Prevention &Treatment Center/Shanghai Eye Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Ian G MorganDivision of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Research School of Biology, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Xun XuShanghai Eye Diseases Prevention &Treatment Center/Shanghai Eye Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Kathryn A RoseDiscipline of Orthoptics, Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, New South Wales, Australia.
Xiangui HeShanghai Eye Diseases Prevention &Treatment Center/Shanghai Eye Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Accurate assessment of uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA) is fundamental to pediatric vision screening. Although the HOTV letter-matching test is recommended for pediatric vision screening, the tumbling E test remains widely used globally despite its higher cognitive demands for young children. Evidence directly comparing UCVA outcomes between the 2 tests across pediatric age groups is limited. Objective: To compare UCVA outcomes from HOTV and tumbling E vision tests and evaluate their suitability for pediatric vision screening. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional observational study, each participant underwent UCVA testing with both HOTV and tumbling E logMAR charts in a randomized sequence, with a 30-minute rest period between tests to minimize fatigue. The study was conducted in Shanghai as part of a national multicenter cohort study in China. Participants included 995 children aged 3 to 15 years who completed both vision tests, cycloplegic refraction, and comprehensive ophthalmic examinations. These data were analyzed from January 2025 to June 2026. Exposure: UCVA assessments using HOTV and tumbling E logMAR tests. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was mean UCVA (logMAR). Secondary outcomes included referral rates for reduced UCVA, screening performance for amblyopia and refractive errors, testability, and time required for vision test. Results: Overall, mean (SD) UCVA was 0.15 (0.22) (20/25) with HOTV and 0.20 (0.20) (20/32) with tumbling E (95% CI, -0.07 to -0.02; P < .001). The difference between the 2 tests decreased with age, initially 1 logMAR line in children aged 3 to younger than 4 years, more than 3 letters in those younger than 8 years, and reducing to 1 or less letters by age 8 years or older. Among 183 preschool children, HOTV test showed a lower referral rate (n = 34 [18.6%]) than tumbling E (n = 57 [31.2%]) (mean difference, -12.6%; 95% CI, -19.2% to -5.9%; P < .001), along with a higher true positive rate (0.68 vs 0.44; P < .001) and better specificity (0.93 vs 0.79; P < .001), with similar measures in older children. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings support the use of the HOTV test for children younger than 8 years. Its use could reduce unnecessary referrals, especially in the context of growing global emphasis on pediatric vision screening and early detection of myopia. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05770661.

Identifiers

PMID42658504
PMCPMC13522989

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.