We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Comment & Response |

Atropine vs Patching

Philip Lempert, MD1
[+] Author Affiliations
1Arleo Eye Associates, Ithaca, New York
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133(5):619. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2014.6111.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


To the Editor The recent article by Repka et al1 concerning maintenance of visual acuity (VA) after treatment for amblyopia contains incongruities between the data and conclusions.

Only 147 of the 419 children (35%) completed the study. The participants with poorer vision (mean VA, 0.13 logMAR) may have been more likely to drop out than the group with better VA (mean VA, 0.19 logMAR). The poorer vision may have reduced their incentive to continue, but in any case it could have enhanced the final result slightly toward better vision in the treated group. It is also interesting that there was a dramatic increase in the percentage of fellow eyes with VA of 20/20 or better from 9.5% initially to 95.9% after 15 years (Table 1 in the article by Repka et al1). This is particularly surprising in view of reports of visual function deficits in the presumably nonamblyopic normal eyes.2 Did the inclusion of fellow eyes with VA better than 20/20 skew the results toward greater mean intraocular differences and increase the number of participants with intraocular differences in VA?


Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview





May 1, 2015
Michael X. Repka, MD, MBA; Raymond T. Kraker, MSPH; Jonathan M. Holmes, BM, BCh; for the Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group
1Wilmer Ophthalmological Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
2Jaeb Center for Health Research, Tampa, Florida
3Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133(5):619-620. doi:10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2014.6131.
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...