Methods
The current study follows the methods of ‘Seeing is Believing: Experimental Evidence of the Impact of Eyeglasses on Academic Performance, Aspirations and Dropout among Junior High School Students in Rural China’, which have been expressed elsewhere, and are summed up for reference.5
Setting
The study was conducted in three nationally designated poverty counties in the Yulin Prefecture of Shaanxi Province. Yulin Prefecture was chosen for the net income (¥9730, equal to $1569) of rural residents in 2014, which was close to the Chinese national rural average income (¥9892 in 2014).21
Sampling and eligibility criteria
The list of middle schools from the three counties was provided by the local boards of education, from which 32 schools were randomly selected from a total of 47. One grade 7 class and one grade 8 class from each of 31 selected schools (one school departed from the study after the baseline survey) responded to questionnaires and participated in VA and refraction testing. Students in the selected classes who met any of the following criteria were eligible for the trial: uncorrected (without eyeglasses) VA ≤6/12 in either eye; refractive error as follows: myopia ≤−0.75 dioptres (D); hyperopia ≥+2.00 D, or astigmatism (non-spherical refractive error) ≥1.00 D; VA which could be improved to 6/7.5 in both eyes with eyeglasses.
Questionnaire
At baseline (September 2013, beginning of the school year), enumerators administered questionnaires to students. The questionnaire included items concerning student age,7 18 gender,7 18 eyeglasses usage at baseline, boarding status,18 rural residence status,22 only child status,23 belief that wearing eyeglasses harms vision (a common misconception in rural China),7 17 time spent on cellphones or computers,20 parental migration status,18 parental eyeglasses wear24 and parental education level.3 6 7 24 Students who owned eyeglasses were told to bring their eyeglasses to school on the day of the baseline examination to measure baseline eyeglasses ownership. In addition, mathematics teachers quantified their blackboard use as a portion of their teaching time (all, most, about half, little, or not at all), which was considered a possible factor driving students with uncorrected refractive error to use eyeglasses. At endline, children were asked whether they were satisfied with the style of the frames of their eyeglasses, the thickness of the lenses and the ease with which glasses could be cleaned.
VA assessment
Using an Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study chart25 (Precision Vision, La Salle, Illinois, USA), a nurse and trained assistant carried out VA testing for each student without refraction at 4 m in a well-lit and indoor area. The top (6/60) line was tested first, and we defined VA of each eye as the lowest line in which a student could identify at least four of five optotypes correctly. If a student could not identify the top line at 4 m, the test was conducted at 1 m, and the measured VA was divided by 4.
Refraction
Students with uncorrected VA ≤6/12 in either eye experienced cycloplegia with up to three drops of cyclopentolate 1%. A refractionist, previously trained by experienced paediatric optometrists from Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, conducted automated refraction (Topcon KR-8900; Tokyo, Japan) with subjective refinement for students. Approximately 10 different styles of child-friendly frames were prepared for the children. Children were permitted to choose the frames they preferred.
Randomisation and interventions
Schools acted as clusters in the cluster-randomised controlled trial (figure 1). In October 2013, after the baseline survey and vision screening but earlier than refraction testing, eligible students were randomised by school to receive one of two interventions (figure 1).
Figure 1Flow chart for enrolment and allocation of students with refractive error in a randomised trial of free eyeglasses to promote eyeglasses wear.
Control group: An eyeglass prescription was given to parents of students on completion of refraction testing. The students in the control group were given free eyeglasses after finishing the endline survey, which was masked to students and teachers in control schools at the beginning of the study.
Intervention group: Based on student refractive power, as tested at school by the optometrist, free eyeglasses were given to the students in the intervention group on completion of refraction testing.
R software (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) was used to generate blocks and assign schools at random within each block to the intervention arm at Stanford University (Palo Alto, California, USA). Participants (students, parents and teachers) and enumerators were unaware of the overall design of the study and the explicit intervention arm assignment.
Outcome assessment
At endline, students’ VA was reassessed by using the protocol and vision chart described above. The main outcome measure of this study is uncorrected LogMAR VA after 9 months, adjusted for baseline VA. Higher values on the LogMAR scale indicated worse vision. Two methods were used to evaluate students’ eyeglasses wear. Nine months after eyeglasses distribution, trained enumerators, unaware of group assignment, went to observe eyeglasses wear during class, which was masked to sampled students. Additionally, enumerators also asked all sampled students in both control and intervention schools to describe their eyeglasses wear as ‘most of the time’, ‘sometimes’, ‘rarely’ or ‘never’. Positive self-reported wear was defined as wearing eyeglasses ‘most of the time’ and ‘sometimes’.
Statistical methods
Baseline eyeglasses ownership was defined as the ability to produce eyeglasses at school at the time of the baseline survey. Refractive power was defined throughout as the spherical equivalent (spherical power plus half the cylindrical power).26
We performed analysis in ITT fashion using multivariate regression models in Stata V.14.2 (StataCorp, College Station, Texas, USA), which calculated robust SEs to adjust for clustering at school level. In the analysis, we use multivariate regression models to assess the correlation between baseline variables, and endline uncorrected VA adjusted for baseline VA. All the variables (baseline uncorrected VA, assignment to the intervention group, gender, baseline eyeglasses ownership, only child status, time spent on computers, refractive error and blackboard use) were included in the multivariate regression models with p≤0.20 in the univariate analysis.3 17 27 28
Missing data: To reduce the inefficiency of estimation due to missing values, multiple imputation in Stata was used to impute data for several variables at baseline, including total time spent on phone (n=2), belief that wearing eyeglasses harms vision (n=1), parental migration status (n=9), parental eyeglasses wear (n=3), rural residence status (n=1), parental education level (n=1) and refractive error (n=32).