Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 27, 2026

Subjective Refraction Test Using a Smartphone for Vision Screening
Published on: October 18, 2024
Spectacle Coverage among Urban Schoolchildren with Refractive Error Provided Subsidized Spectacles in North India
Vivek Gupta1, Rohit Saxena, Praveen Vashist1
1Department of Community Ophthalmology, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Significance:
Provision of subsidized spectacles to schoolchildren with refractive error in Delhi was associated with increased spectacle coverage.
Purpose:
Studies involving free spectacle distribution and self-purchase of spectacles often report poor compliance. We assessed 1-year spectacle coverage among schoolchildren with refractive error who were provided subsidized spectacles.
Methods:
This was a study of a prospective cohort of 10,114 students from 20 randomly selected schools of Delhi. Children were presumed to have refractive error when unaided visual acuity was worse than or equal to 6/12 in either eye and a best-corrected visual acuity better than or equal to 6/9.5 in both eyes (n = 1503). Children with unmet need of spectacles (presenting with a visual acuity worse than 6/9.5 in the worse eye) were provided subsidized spectacles (n = 1191). Coverage was established by direct observation at baseline and after 1 year through unannounced visits.
Results:
Mean age of cohort was 12.0 ± 2.0 years, and 566 (37.7%) were girls. Baseline spectacle coverage was 29.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27.1 to 31.7%), which improved to 65.9% (95% CI, 56.0 to 61.6%) among all children (n = 1470) and 58.8% (95% CI, 56.0 to 61.6%) among children with unmet need (n = 1163) at 1 year. Uptake of the subsidized spectacles was 98.6%. On multivariate regression, the odds of spectacle use were greatest when unaided vision was poor: 55.5% when visual acuity was better than or equal to 6/9.5, 74.8% when visual acuity was 6/19 to 6/60 (adjusted odds ratio, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.7 to 3.5), and 91.5% when visual acuity was worse than 6/60 (adjusted odds ratio, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.0 to 9.5). Sex (boys, 66.3%; girls, 65.3%) and socioeconomic status (lower, 58.6%; middle, 61.8%; upper middle, 70.7%) were not associated with coverage. Increasing maternal education and baseline spectacle use were associated with coverage. However, 38.0% were wearing spectacles prescribed by the project, and 61.9% of the spectacles being used at 1 year were purchased in the open market.
Conclusions:
Spectacle coverage after 1 year increased through a subsidized spectacle scheme, particularly for children with poor uncorrected vision.
Related Concept Videos
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Fundamental Attribution Error
Random Error
Margin of Error
Contaminants and Errors
Another key consideration is determining the appropriate number of samples required to...
Standard Error of the Mean
The standard error of the mean is an example of a standard error. It is a unique standard deviation known as the standard deviation of the sampling distribution of the mean. The standard error of the mean is a statistic that calculates how correctly a sample distribution represents a...

