Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol
July 2013
Background: This study compares the influence of two different types of magnification (magnifier versus large print) on crowded near vision task performance.
Methods: Fifty-eight visually impaired children aged 4-8 years participated. Participants were divided in two groups, matched on age and near visual acuity (NVA): [1] the magnifier group (4-6 year olds [n = 13] and 7-8 year olds [n = 19]), and [2] the large print group (4-6 year olds [n = 12] and 7-8 year olds [n = 14]).
Purpose: This study evaluated the effect of an evidence-based magnifier training on viewing behavior in visually impaired children aged 3 to 6½ years.
Methods: Effects of a training with a stand magnifier were evaluated by analyzing recordings of 21 visually impaired children, obtained from a miniature camera mounted in the magnifier. In a pre-test, post-test design, 11 of the children trained without magnifier and 10 children trained with magnifier.
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd
December 2011
Objective: The demand for eye-care services in the Netherlands is increasing. This article indicates the causes and attempts to provide an estimate of the increase between 2010 and 2020 and to indicate what will be the consequences.
Design: Descriptive study.
Purpose: This study describes the binocular eccentric gaze direction (EGD) of 434 patients with binocular central field loss and presents a comparison with other studies on eccentric gaze behavior.
Methods: We reviewed the records of 434 patients with bilateral central scotomas. Eligible patients had not received eccentric viewing training and demonstrated a spontaneously developed eccentric gaze behavior.
We report an experiment concerning the use of a stand magnifier by young children with visual impairments (21 males, 12 females; mean age 4y 8mo [SD 11mo]). Children had a normative developmental level and a visual acuity of 0.4 or less (< or =20/50 in Snellen's notation).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF