HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kutschke, P. J. Search for Related Content

PEDIG Results in Perspective: Concerns

Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be addressed to: Pamela J. Kutschke, C.O., Ophthalmology/UIHC, 200 Hawkins Drive, Iowa City, IA 52242-1091; e-mail: pamela-kutschke{at}uiowa.edu.

Introduction: The treatment of amblyopia is a large part of the pediatric ophthalmology and orthoptic practice. The Amblyopia Treatment Studies (ATS) have tried to answer questions about which treatments work for different types of amblyopia and which treatments work the best.

Methods: Each of the ATS articles were examined for strengths and weaknesses with particular emphasis on the ATS1, patching versus atropine study.

Results: Many strengths and weaknesses were found. As indicated by this article's title, the weaknesses were emphasized.

Conclusions: These studies had, as all prospective studies do, strict inclusion criteria that hampered the study by limiting the included patients. However, in some areas the study's methodology was not strict enough, making the results subject to question.

Key words: amblyopia, PEDIG, atropine, patching