This is the unspecified version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link Abstract.Visual impairment is a large and growing socioeconomic problem. Good evidence on rehabilitation outcomes is required to guide service development and improve the lives of people with sight loss.Of the 478 potentially relevant articles identified, only 58 studies met our liberal inclusion criteria, and of these only 7 were randomized controlled trials. Although the literature is sufficient to confirm that rehabilitation services result in improved clinical and functional ability outcomes, the effects on mood, vision-related quality of life (QoL) and health-related QoL are less clear. There are some good data on the performance of particular types of intervention, but almost no useful data about outcomes in children, those of working age and other minority groups. There were no reports on cost effectiveness. Overall, the number of well designed and adequately reported studies is pitifully small; visual rehabilitation research needs higher quality research. We highlight study design and reporting considerations and suggest a future research agenda.

Aims: (1) To explore the relation between performance on tasks of familiar face recognition (FFR) and face expression difference discrimination (FED) with both perceived disability in face recognition and clinical measures of visual function in subjects with age related macular degeneration (AMD). (2) To quantify the gain in performance for face recognition tasks when subjects use a bioptic telescopic low vision device. Methods: 30 subjects with AMD (age range 66-90 years; visual acuity 0.4-1.4 logMAR) were recruited for the study. Perceived (self rated) disability in face recognition was assessed by an eight item questionnaire covering a range of issues relating to face recognition. Visual functions measured were distance visual acuity (ETDRS logMAR charts), continuous text reading acuity (MNRead charts), contrast sensitivity (Pelli-Robson chart), and colour vision (large panel D-15). In the FFR task, images of famous people had to be identified. FED was assessed by a forced choice test where subjects had to decide which one of four images showed a different facial expression. These tasks were repeated with subjects using a bioptic device. Results: Overall perceived disability in face recognition did not correlate with performance on either task, although a specific item on difficulty recognising familiar faces did correlate with FFR (r = 0.49, p<0.05). FFR performance was most closely related to distance acuity (r = −0.69, p<0.001), while FED performance was most closely related to continuous text reading acuity (r = −0.79, p<0.001). In multiple regression, neither contrast sensitivity nor colour vision significantly increased the explained variance. When using a bioptic telescope, FFR performance improved in 86% of subjects (median gain = 49%; p<0.001), while FED performance increased in 79% of subjects (median gain = 50%; p<0.01). Conclusion: Distance and reading visual acuity are closely associated with measured task performance in FFR and FED. A bioptic low vision device can offer a significant improvement in performance for face recognition tasks, and may be useful in reducing the handicap associated with this disability. There is, however, little evidence for a correlation between self rated difficulty in face recognition and measured performance for either task. Further work is needed to explore the complex relation between the perception of disability and measured performance.A ge related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of visual impairment in developed countries.