Skip to main content
main-content
Top

Tip

Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 12/2020

12-07-2020 | Letter to the Editor

The Underreporting of Visual Issues in Statutory Education Documents: Comment on Harvey et al. (2020)

Auteurs: Julie-Anne Little, Emma McConnell, Julie McClelland, Shelley Black, Kathryn Saunders

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders | Uitgave 12/2020

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Excerpt

Harvey et al. ( 2020) note in their paper, “The main limitation of this work is that we would ideally have been able to verify the actual visual status of all children reported on in this study via a full optometric assessment; rather than relying on parental report. Future work could therefore aim to carry out a more comprehensive study to include such an assessment.” We would like to direct Harvey and her colleagues to the work undertaken by our group which addresses this limitation. Little and Saunders ( 2015) investigated how visual deficits were represented in the statutory documents of children with special educational needs and, furthermore, included a comparison with the clinical information on children’s visual status held in hospital records. As anticipated, visual deficits were relatively common in this group of children with learning disability, with diagnoses including Autism spectrum disorder, Down syndrome and global developmental delay. While these visual deficits were explicit in the hospital eye clinic notes, the majority (55%) of Education, Health and Care plans (referred to as Statements of Educational Need in Northern Ireland at the time of publication) did not contain any information regarding either reduced visual acuity or significant refractive error . Table 1, modified from this work, presents participant information for children whose Education, Health and Care plans failed to record any visual needs, but whose clinical records identify visual deficits meeting the criteria of visual impairment as defined by the World Health Organisation, significant refractive error, and/or significant ocular pathology (World Health Organisation 2010). In other cases, where information on visual deficits was included in Education, Health and Care plans, it was generally limited to technical descriptions of visual acuity measures, presence of strabismus (squint) or refractive status in a way that has little meaning for a non-eyecare professional unless supplemented with information explaining what these metrics translate to in lay terms.
Table 1
Individual participant clinical visual information from Little and Saunders ( 2015), for those with (i) visual acuity > 0.3logMAR (World Health Organisation definition of visual impairment) and/or (ii) significant refractive error, who did not have any information contained in Statutory Educational documents regarding reference to visual problems, description of spectacle wear, or certification of visual impairment (where relevant)
Subject ID
Education & Healthcare Plans Statutory documents: scrutiny of vision information using following criteria:
Clinical Visual Information
(i) Any record of certification of Visual Impairment?
(ii) Any reference to Visual problems?
(iii)Any indication of need for Spectacles
Any phrases pertinent to vision anywhere within documents?
VA poorer than 0.3logMAR?
Significant refractive error?
Details of any significant ocular pathology
Yes/No
Details
Yes/No
Details
 
M11
No to all
‘Hypermetropic RE more than LE’
Yes
0.5logMAR (Cardiff Acuity Preferential Looking Test)
Yes
Hyperopia
Cornelia de Lange syndrome; crowded optic discs
Q23
No to all
None
Yes
0.35logMAR (Kay pictures)
Yes
Myopia
 
T18
No to all
None
Yes
0.3logMAR (Keeler Crowded LogMAR letter chart)
Yes
Myopia
 
L13
No to all
None
Yes
0.5logMAR (Cardiff Acuity Preferential Looking Test)
No
   
H1
No to all
‘No concerns about vision’
Yes
0.4LogMAR (Cardiff Acuity Preferential Looking Test)
No
   
Q9
No to all
None
Yes
0.4logMAR (Cardiff Acuity Preferential Looking Test)
No
   
N22
No to all
None
Yes
0.3logMAR (Cardiff Acuity Preferential Looking Test)
Not assessed
 
H28
No to all
‘May have some problems accessing small print’
Yes
0.3logMAR (Cardiff Acuity Preferential Looking Test)
No
 
Bilateral optic atrophy
M21
No to all
‘No concerns regarding vision’
No
0.22logMAR (Kay pictures)
Yes
Hyperopia
 
T27
No to all
‘Parental concerns about vision’
No
0.22logMAR (Kay pictures)
Yes
High hyperopia
 
Literatuur
go back to reference McKerr, L., McConnell, E. L., Black, S. A., McClelland, J., Little, J. A., Saunders, K. J., et al. (2020). Meeting vision needs of children with special educational needs: Case studies of the impact on behavior and academic achievement. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(1), 45–58. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​bld.​12313. CrossRef McKerr, L., McConnell, E. L., Black, S. A., McClelland, J., Little, J. A., Saunders, K. J., et al. (2020). Meeting vision needs of children with special educational needs: Case studies of the impact on behavior and academic achievement. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(1), 45–58. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​bld.​12313. CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
The Underreporting of Visual Issues in Statutory Education Documents: Comment on Harvey et al. (2020)
Auteurs
Julie-Anne Little
Emma McConnell
Julie McClelland
Shelley Black
Kathryn Saunders
Publicatiedatum
12-07-2020
Uitgeverij
Springer US
Gepubliceerd in
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders / Uitgave 12/2020
Print ISSN: 0162-3257
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-3432
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04609-x