A Phase 2 interventional study of photorefraction in Amblyopia, sponsored by Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. Completed at 1 site in Iran, Islamic Republic of. Open to participants aged 1 Year to 14 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2011-03-08.
Sponsored by Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences · Phase 2, Interventional, and Diagnostic
Purpose: : This study was performed to compare the accuracy of non-cycloplegic photorefraction with cycloplegic refraction in detection of refractive amblyopia risk factors and determine some corresponding beneficial cut points.
Method: In this diagnostic accuracy study, right eyes of 185 children (1 to 14 years) underwent first non-cycloplegic photorefraction (with PlusOptix SO4 photoscreener) and then cycloplegic refraction from October 2009 to August 2010. Based on the cycloplegic refraction results, hyperopia (≥+3.5D), myopia (≥-3D), astigmatism (≥1.5D), and anisometropia (≥1.5D) were set as criteria based on AAPOS guidelines. The difference in detection of refractive amblyopia risk factors between the two methods was the main outcome measure.
183 studies on the registry are indexed under Amblyopia; 43 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 185 is above the median of 60 across 133 interventional studies indexed under Amblyopia.
Browse Amblyopia studies →Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences is the lead sponsor of 221 studies on the registry; 19 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
Device: photorefraction
photorefraction is a name of device.
refraction
cycloplegic auto refraction \& Non-cycloplegic photorefraction
Time frame: 10 months
hyperopia (≥+3.5D), myopia (≥-3D), astigmatism (≥1.5D), and anisometropia (≥1.5D) were set as criteria based on AAPOS guidelines.
cycloplegic auto refraction \& Non-cycloplegic photorefraction
Time frame: 10 months
This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2009. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences