Test‐retest reproducibility of accommodative facility measures in primary school children

REFERENCES

• Daum KM. Accommodative dysfunction. Doc Ophthalmol 1983; 55: 177–198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wick B, Hall P. Relation among accommodative facility, lag and amplitude in elementary school children. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1987; 64: 593–598.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jackson TW, Goss DA. Variation and correlation of clinical tests of accommodative function in a sample of school‐age children. J Am Optom Assoc 1991; 62: 857–866.
   Google Scholar
• Kulp MT, Schmidt PP. Visual predictors of reading performance in kindergarten and first grade children. Optom Vis Sci 1996; 73: 255–262.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palomo‐alvarez C, Puell MC. Accommodative function in school children with reading difficulties. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2008; 246: 1769–1774.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dusek W, Pierscionek BK, Mcclelland JF. A survey of visual function in an Austrian population of school‐age children with reading and writing difficulties. BMC Ophthalmol 2010; 10: 16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine S, Ciuffreda KJ, Selenow A et al. Clinical assessment of accommodative facility in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals. J Am Optom Assoc 1985; 56: 286–290.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hennessey D, Iosue RA, Rouse MW. Relation of symptoms to accommodative infacility of school‐aged children. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1984; 61: 177–183.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wajuihian SO, Hansrai R. Accommodative anomalies in a sample of black high school students in South Africa. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2016; 23: 316–323.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hussaindeen JR, Rakshit A, Singh NK et al. Prevalence of non‐strabismic anomalies of binocular vision in Tamil Nadu: report 2 of BAND study. Clin Exp Optom 2017; 100: 642–648.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sterner B, Abrahamsson M, Sjostrom A. Accommodative facility training with a long term follow up in a sample of school aged children showing accommodative dysfunction. Doc Ophthalmol 2000; 99: 93–101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sterner B, Abrahamsson M, Sjostrom A. The effects of accommodative facility training on a group of children with impaired relative accommodation‐ a comparison between dioptric treatment and sham treatment. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2001; 21: 470–476.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper J, Feldman J, Selenow A et al. Reduction of asthenopia after accommodative facility training. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1987; 64: 430–436.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Scheiman M, Cotter S, Kulp MT et al. Treatment of accommodative dysfunction in children: results from a randomized clinical trial. Optom Vis Sci 2011; 88: 1343–1352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zellers JA, Alpert TL, Rouse MW. A review of the literature and a normative study of accommodative facility. J Am Optom Assoc 1984; 55: 31–37.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rouse MW, Deland PN, Mozayani S et al. Binocular accommodative facility testing reliability. Optom Vis Sci 1992; 69: 314–319.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rouse MW, Deland PN, Chous R et al. Monocular accommodative facility testing reliability. Optom Vis Sci 1989; 66: 72–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siderov J, Johnston AW. The importance of test parameters in the clinical assessment of accommodative facility. Optom Vis Sci 1990; 67: 551–557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kedzia B, Pieczyrak D, Tondel G et al. Factors affecting the clinical testing of accommodative facility. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1999; 19: 12–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wick B, Yothers TL, Jiang BC et al. Clinical testing of accommodative facility: part 1. A critical appraisal of the literature. Optometry 2002; 73: 11–23.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yothers T, Wick B, Morse SE. Clinical testing of accommodative facility: part II. Development of an amplitude‐scaled test. Optometry 2002; 73: 91–102.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wick B, Gall R, Yothers T. Clinical testing of accommodative facility: part III. Masked assessment of the relation between visual symptoms and binocular test results in school children and adults. Optometry 2002; 73: 173–181.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Scheiman M, Herzberg H, Frantz K et al. Normative study of accommodative facility in elementary schoolchildren. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1988; 65: 127–134.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Adler P, Scally AJ, Barrett BT. Test‐retest variability of Randot stereoacuity measures gathered in an unselected sample of UK primary school children. Br J Ophthalmol 2012; 96: 656–661.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adler P, Scally AJ, Barrett BT. Test‐retest reproducibility of accommodation measurements gathered in an unselected sample of UK primary school children. Br J Ophthalmol 2013; 97: 592–597.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia A, Cacho P, Lara F et al. The relation between accommodative facility and general binocular dysfunction. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2000; 20: 898–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mckenzie KM, Kerr SR, Rouse MW. Study of accommodative facility testing reliability. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1987; 64: 186–194.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Scheiman M, Gallaway M, Coulter R et al. Prevalence of vision and ocular disease conditions in a clinical population. J Am Optom Assoc 1996; 67: 193–202.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar