MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411142548 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0324914

The CLASS (Cerebral visual impairment Learning and Awareness for School Staff) Pilot Study: An evaluation of the awareness of CVI amongst teachers and comparative evaluation of two different educational resources on understanding

2025· article· en· W4411142548 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Helen St Clair Tracy, John Ravenscroft, Andrew Blaikie

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLaidlaw FoundationUniversity of St Andrews
KeywordsMainstreamVisual impairmentPsychological interventionPsychologyMedicineMedical educationResource (disambiguation)NursingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cerebral visual impairment (CVI) is the leading cause of visual impairment in children in high income countries. Despite its prevalence, awareness of CVI among educators remains low, meaning that many affected children may not receive the support they need in school. While previous research has highlighted the challenges faced by children with CVI, few studies have systematically assessed teacher awareness and the effectiveness of targeted educational interventions in improving classroom practices. This study addresses this gap by evaluating: (1) teacher awareness of CVI, (2) existing classroom practices that may impact children with CVI, (3) the effectiveness of two CVI educational media formats (video and text) in increasing understanding, and (4) the changes teachers would be willing to implement following exposure to these resources. By comparing the impact of these two formats, this study provides insights into how best to deliver CVI training for teachers in a way that is both accessible and effective. A total of 111 teachers from primary, secondary, and special schools across the UK participated in a survey incorporating either a three-minute video simulation or a 1.5-minute text-based resource about CVI. Before exposure, 72% of participants had not heard of CVI, with awareness particularly low among mainstream teachers (98% of primary and 80% of secondary teachers were unaware). Teachers also reported inconsistent use of CVI-supportive practices, such as reducing classroom clutter and simplifying smart screen content. Both media formats significantly increased teachers' willingness to implement changes (p < 0.0001). The text format showed a slightly greater increase in average Likert scores, and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test revealed a larger statistical effect for text (z = -12.91) compared to video (z = -8.90). However, the video format was also highly effective, producing a similarly strong impact, with both formats achieving an identical median increase of 1.0. These results suggest that while text may have led to slightly larger shifts in rank-based scores, the video format remained a powerful and engaging tool for increasing teachers' willingness to implement CVI-supportive strategies. The findings suggest that small, manageable adaptations, such as reducing visual distractions and maintaining consistency in classroom layouts, are practical for teachers and may have a meaningful impact on children with CVI. This study highlights the potential of bite-size learning resources in raising awareness and encouraging evidence-based teaching adaptations. By providing concise, accessible materials, teachers can be equipped with strategies to support children with CVI while minimising additional workload demands. Future efforts should focus on scaling these resources to reach a wider audience, including families and caregivers, to foster a more inclusive understanding and response to CVI.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.301
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.157 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207