Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Is school vision screening effective?

B P Yawn1, E G Lydick, R Epstein

  • 1Olmsted Medical Center, Rochester, MN 55903-4300, USA.

The Journal of School Health
|May 1, 1996
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Enhancements in Laser-Direct-Drive Nuclear Performance with Target Radius.

Physical review letters·2026
Same author

Applications of a Rayleigh-Taylor model to direct-drive laser fusion.

Physical review. E·2024
Same author

Achievement of Target Gain Larger than Unity in an Inertial Fusion Experiment.

Physical review letters·2024
Same author

Laser-direct-drive fusion target design with a high-Z gradient-density pusher shell.

Physical review. E·2023
Same author

Hot-electron preheat and mitigation in polar-direct-drive experiments at the National Ignition Facility.

Physical review. E·2022
Same author

Lawson Criterion for Ignition Exceeded in an Inertial Fusion Experiment.

Physical review letters·2022
Same journal

Response to Letter to the Editor, Re: Student Differences in a Social-Emotional Learning Program: Engagement and Individual Factors.

The Journal of school health·2026
Same journal

Re: Student Differences in a Social-Emotional Learning Program: Engagement and Individual Factors.

The Journal of school health·2026
Same journal

Understanding Multi-Victimization: Identifying Socioecological Supports Among Adolescents.

The Journal of school health·2026
Same journal

Journal of School Health Transition and Research Priorities for 2026-2029.

The Journal of school health·2026
Same journal

Student and Teacher Attitudes Toward a School-Based Firearm Injury Prevention Presentation in Washington State.

The Journal of school health·2026
Same journal

Sense of School Belonging and School Reintegration for Students Hospitalized With Chronic or Complex Medical Diseases: Insights From a Grounded Theory Study.

The Journal of school health·2026
See all related articles

School vision screenings identify many children needing eye care, with referrals increasing with age. While most referred children receive follow-up, delays in appointments with eye care professionals are common.

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology
  • Public Health
  • Pediatrics

Background:

  • School vision screening programs are crucial for early detection of visual impairments in children.
  • Understanding the incidence of abnormal screening tests and follow-up care rates is essential for optimizing pediatric eye health.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To estimate the incidence of abnormal school vision screening tests in a large pediatric cohort.
  • To determine the rates of follow-up care with ophthalmologists or optometrists after abnormal screenings.
  • To analyze the timeliness of these follow-up appointments.

Main Methods:

  • A population-based cohort of 2,938 children was retrospectively followed from kindergarten through 12th grade.
  • Data collected included abnormal school vision screening test results and subsequent eye care professional visits.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Incidence rates and median follow-up times were calculated.

    • Main Results:

    • 28% of children had at least one abnormal school vision screening test.
    • Abnormal screening rates increased from 1.2% at age five to 9.1% at age 13.
    • 91% of referred children received follow-up, but median delays were 0.8 years (ophthalmologist) and 1.8 years (optometrist).

    Conclusions:

    • Simple visual acuity screening in schools remains effective.
    • Consideration should be given to extending screening beyond age 12.
    • Strategies to expedite parental response to referrals are needed to reduce delays in eye care.