Photoscreening for amblyogenic risk factors in 1-year-olds: results from a single center in Portugal over a 9-year period

Ruão, Miguel; Almeida, Inês Martins de; Leitão, Raquel; Amorim, Manuela; Monteiro, Madalena; Matos, J. Coimbra de; Salgado-Borges, José; Ferreira, Carla; Chibante-Pedro, João

doi:10.1016/j.jaapos.2016.06.003

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We included 13 primary cross-sectional studies [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] published between 2001 and 2021. The number of children enrolled spanned between 404 and 42,149.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…PlusOptix 20,24,26,28,29 and SPOT 21,22,25,27,30 was the most used device, followed by MTI 18,23,28 and Retinomax. 19 One study 28 used an MTI in the first years of screening that was subsequently replaced by PlusOptix for the remaining period.…”

Section: Screening Devices and Referral Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four studies [26][27][28]30 reported the motifs of referral. Astigmatism was the most common reason in 3 studies 26,27,30 while anisometropia was the main cause of referral in the other study.…”

Section: Screening Devices and Referral Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Astigmatism was the most common reason in 3 studies 26,27,30 while anisometropia was the main cause of referral in the other study. 28…”

Section: Screening Devices and Referral Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A risk of bias graph is presented in Supplementary Figure 1, whereas the risk of bias summary for each included primary study is presented in the Supplementary Figure 2. Six studies 20,22,24,26,28,30 presented low risk of bias.…”

Section: Quality Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Photoscreening for amblyopia risk factors assessment in young children: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Ferreira

Vieira

Maia

et al. 2022

European Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Amblyopia is a leading cause of preventable and treatable vision loss in the pediatric population. Instrument-based screening of amblyopia-risk factors is being widely adopted but the audit of its results is still lacking. We sought to review the existing evidence regarding the outcomes of photoscreening applied to children under the age of three years. Methods A three-database search (Pubmed, ISI Web of Science, and Scopus) was performed from inception to March 2021. A meta-analysis of proportions was conducted to summarize the referral rate, untestable rate and positive predictive value (PPV). Results Thirteen studies were selected among 705 original abstracts. The quantitative analysis included twelve studies enrolling 64,041 children. Of these, 13% (95%CI: 7–19%) were referred for further confirmation of the screening result. Astigmatism was the most common diagnosis both after screening and after ophthalmologic assessment of referred children. The pooled untestable rate and PPV were 8% (95%CI: 3–15%) and 56% (95%CI: 40–71%), respectively. Conclusion There is no global consensus on the optimal age, frequency or what magnitude of refractive error must be considered an amblyopia-risk factor. Optimization of referral criteria is therefore warranted.

show abstract