Back to search

Article

Do we really know the prevalence of accomodative and nonstrabismic binocular dysfunctions? ¿Conocemos realmente la prevalencia de disfunciones binoculares no estrábicas y de acomodación?

2010-10-01

Abstract excerpt

<h4>Purpose</h4> To determine the scientific evidence about the prevalence of accommodative and nonstrabismic binocular anomalies. <h4>Methods</h4> We carried out a systematic review of studies published between 1986 and 2009, analysing the MEDLINE, CINAHL, FRANCIS and PsycINFO databases. We considered admitting those papers related to prevalence in paediatric and adult populations. We identified 660 articles and...

Topics

Open a Topic to create a Post that cites this publication.

Identifiers and source

Literature Corpus work
12777b42-763d-53b3-b510-ff1a59dd1383
DOI
10.1016/s1888-4296(10)70028-5
PMCID
PMC3974377
Open publication

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest
Interactive article relationship graphSelect a related publication card to move it into the centre and load its closest explainable connections. Solid lines are source-backed structured connections. Dashed lines are semantic discovery signals and are not scientific evidence.
Do we really know the prevalence of accomodative and nonstrabismic binocular dysfunctions? ¿Conocemos realmente la prevalencia de disfunciones binoculares no estrábicas y de acomodación?DOI 10.1016/s1888-4296(10)70028-5
Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.