MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386575313 · doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2023.09.005

Impact of Vision Impairment and Ocular Morbidity and Their Treatment on Quality of Life in Children

2023· review· en· W4386575313 on OpenAlexafffund
Dongfeng Li, Ving Fai Chan, Gianni Virgili, Sonia Mavi, Sheetal Pundir, Manpreet K. Singh, Xinshu She, Prabhath Piyasena, Mike Clarke, Noelle Whitestone, Jennifer L. Patnaik, Baixiang Xiao, David H. Cherwek, Habtamu Negash, Sara O’Connor, S. Grace Prakalapakorn, Huilan Huang, Huan Wang, Matthew Boswell, Nathan Congdon

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersMedical Research CouncilSantenQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)OptometryVisual impairmentIntensive care medicineOphthalmologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TOPIC: This review summarizes existing evidence of the impact of vision impairment and ocular morbidity and their treatment on children's quality of life (QoL). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Myopia and strabismus are associated with reduced QoL among children. Surgical treatment of strabismus significantly improves affected children's QoL. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis by screening articles in any language in 9 databases published from inception through August 22, 2022, addressing the impact of vision impairment, ocular morbidity, and their treatment on QoL in children. We reported pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) using random-effects meta-analysis models. Quality appraisal was performed using Joanna Briggs Institute and National Institutes of Health tools. This study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (identifier, CRD42021233323). RESULTS: Our search identified 29 118 articles, 44 studies (0.15%) of which were included for analysis that included 32 318 participants from 14 countries between 2005 and 2022. Seventeen observational and 4 interventional studies concerned vision impairment, whereas 10 observational and 13 interventional studies described strabismus and other ocular morbidities. Twenty-one studies were included in the meta-analysis. The QoL scores did not differ between children with and without vision impairment (SMD, -1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.11 to 0.03; P = 0.06; 9 studies). Myopic children demonstrated significantly lower QoL scores than those with normal vision (SMD, -0.60; 95% CI, -1.09 to -0.11; P = 0.02; 7 studies). Children with strabismus showed a significantly lower QoL score compared with those without (SMD, -1.19; 95% CI, -1.66 to -0.73; P < 0.001; 7 studies). Strabismus surgery significantly improved QoL in children (SMD, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.48-2.23; P < 0.001; 7 studies). No randomized controlled trials (RCTs) concerning refractive error and QoL were identified. Among all included studies, 35 (79.5%) were scored as low to moderate quality; the remaining met all quality appraisal tools criteria. DISCUSSION: Reduced QoL was identified in children with myopia and strabismus. Surgical correction of strabismus improves the QoL of affected children, which supports insurance coverage of strabismus surgery. Further studies, especially RCTs, investigating the impact of correction of myopia on QoL are needed. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.009
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.140
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmologySame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207