Table 5 Type of study and outcome for quantitative studies on near visual acuity in 8-13 year olds
From: Assessment of near visual acuity in 0–13 year olds with normal and low vision: a systematic review
Type of study | Number of participants, group (and age). | Method | Outcome | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Peckham 1975 [43] | Cross sectional | N = 12772 Group = NV Age = 11 years | Test: Near vision (Sheridan Gardener test) and distance vision (Snellen chart) Distance: 25 cm and 6 m Optotype spacing: 1× letter size (edge-to-edge) Response: Verbal. | Distance vision: - Optimal vision (6/6 or better): 77.6% - Near optimal (6/9 or better): 10% - Moderate impairment (6/18-6/12): 7.1% - Severe impairment (≤6/24): 5.3% Near vision: - Optimal vision: 87.6% - Near optimal: 7% - Moderate impairment: 4% - Severe impairment:1.4% |
Cummings 1996 [37] | Cross sectional | N = 1809 Group = NV Age = 8–10 years | Test: Not specified (near and distance vision) Distance: Not specified Optotype spacing: Not specified Response: Not specified | Normal vision (6/6): 69% Myopia: 24.3% Hypermetropia:0.7% Amblyopia: 1.5% Near vision problems: 12/1809 (<1%). |
Myers 1999 [48] | Cross sectional | N = 106 Group = NV Age = 10 years | Test: ETDRS chart (near and distance) Distance: 40 cm and 4 m Optotype spacing: Not specified Response: Verbal | See Fig. 5. |
Wolffsohn 2000 [45] | Cross sectional | N = 53 Group = VI Age = 9–91 (median age 80 years) | Test: Practical near acuity card (PNAC) and Bailey-Lovie near and distance chart Distance: 25 cm (near). Distance Bailey-Lovie unspecified. Optotype spacing: default Times new roman spacing (approx. 0.1× letter size) and 1× letter size Response: Verbal. | Mean DVA was 0.91 ± 0.04 logMAR. Good correlation between distance VA and PNAC (r = 0.74). No differences between PNAC and near Bailey-Lovie chart measures (r = 0.97). |
Virgili 2004 [44] | Cross sectional | N = 116 Group = NV Age = 6–12 years | Test: Italian version MNREAD, distance vision ETDRS Distance: 40 cm, ETDRS distance not specified Optotype spacing: reading setting (approx. ×1.1 letter size) Response: Verbal. | See Fig. 5. |
Larsson 2005 [33] | Cross sectional | N = 217 Group = NV Age = 10 years | Test: LEA chart (near and distance) Distance: 40 cm and 3 m Optotype spacing: not specified Response: Verbal. | See Fig. 5. |
Hanson 2006 [39] | Cross sectional | N = 26 Group = VI Age = 10–50 years | Test: S-charts at 40 cm and 3.75 m, Bailey-Lovie at distance (6 m) and ETDRS at near (preferred working distance). Distance: 40 cm, 3.75 m and 6 m. Optotype spacing: 1× letter size Response: Verbal | No consistent differences between near and distance VA’s. |
Fabian 2013 [38] | Cross sectional | N = 66 Group = NV Age = mean age 9 years | Test: Jaeger (near) and ETDRS (distance) Distance: not specified. Optotype spacing: not specified Response: Verbal. | See Fig. 5. All children with NV had a J1* score for near vision. |
Larsson 2015 [40] | Cross sectional | N = 217 Group = NV Age = 10 years | Test: LEA test (near and distance), linear logMAR chart (distance), LEA single optotypes (3 m) Distance: 40 cm and 3 or 4 meter Optotype spacing: not specified Response: Verbal. | See Fig. 5. |
Li 2015 [41] | Cross sectional | N = 190 Group = NV Age = 10–14 years | Test: logMAR visual acuity chart Distance: 40 cm and 4 meter Optotype spacing: not specified Response: Verbal. | See Fig. 5. |