Research Opportunities

Participation in research studies can lead to new or improved treatments while benefitting participants with advanced care. Studies currently recruiting new subjects are listed below. See if one may benefit you! You also can sign up to receive information about future studies, learn about current studies, and read results from past studies.

CITT-ART (Convergence Insufficiency Attention & Reading Trial)Convergence Insufficiency Attention & Reading Trial (CITT-ART)

Purpose

To examine the effect of treatment for convergence insufficiency on reading and attention

Who

  • Children ages 9-14 (Grades 3-8)
  • Children who have the following symptoms when reading: eye strain, headaches, blur, poor concentration, and losing their place
  • Children with Convergence Insufficiency (CI), a problem with how the eyes work together

Funding Source

  • National Eye Institute (NEI)

 

MORE INFO


Contact Lens StudyBifocal & Atropine in Myopia Study (BAM)

Purpose

To determine whether a combination treatment of soft bifocal contact lenses (typically used to help people older than 40 see up close) and low dose atropine eye drops (typically used to dilate the pupil) slows the progression of nearsightedness.

Who

  • Children ages 7-11
  • Children who are nearsighted 
  • Children in good general health without problems that may affect contact lens wear
  • Additional screening questions will be asked by phone or email

Funding Source

  • National Eye Institute (NEI)

MORE INFO


blink (Bifocal Lenses in Nearsighted Kids)Bifocal Lenses in Nearsighted Kids (BLINK)

Purpose

To determine whether soft bifocal contact lenses slow the progression of nearsightedness in children

Who Participated

  • Children ages 7 to 11
  • Nearsightedness (difficulty seeing far away without glasses)
  • In good general health without any problems that may affect contact lens wear

Expected Completion

  • June 2019

Funding Source

  • National Eye Institute (NEI)

ATS (Amblyopia Treatment Study)

Amblyopia Treatment Study 18 (ATS)

Study of binocular computer activities for treatment of amblyopia

Purpose

To evaluate the effectiveness of a new iPad treatment for lazy eye (amblyopia) as compared to standard patching treatment in school-aged children.

Who Participated

  • Children ages 5 to 16
  • Children with amblyopia (lazy eye) in one eye

Expected Completion

  • July 2017

Funding Source

  • National Eye Institute (NEI)

 


The Vision in Preschoolers–Hyperopia in Preschoolers (VIP-HIP) Study

Top Three Results

  1. Children ages 4 to 5 years old who have uncorrected farsightedness (3.00–6.00 diopters) with reduced near visual function performed significantly worse on a test of early literacy as compared to children without moderate farsightedness.
  2. Children with moderate farsightedness and normal near visual function performed similar to children without moderate farsightedness.
  3. Further studies are needed to determine the effect of correction for moderate hyperopia on near visual function and early literacy.

Publications

  1. Uncorrected Hyperopia and Preschool Literacy: Results of the Vision in Preschoolers-Hyperopia in Preschoolers (VIP-HIP) Study. Ophthalmology 2016; 123(4):681-689.
  2. https://optometry.osu.edu/news/2016-01-27/farsighted-kids%E2%80%99-reading-skills-fall-behind-they-start-first-grade
  3. https://nei.nih.gov/news/pressrelease/farsightedness_linked_literacy_deficits

Funding Source

  • National Eye Institute (NEI)

 


Adolescent and Child Health Initiative to Encourage Vision Empowerment (ACHIEVE) Study

 

Top Three Results

1. Contact lens wear improves children’s physical appearance, athletic competence, and social acceptance self-perceptions

2. Soft contact lens wear increases myopia progression by less than 0.25 D over three years

3. Older children, children who participate in recreational activities, and children who do not like their appearance in glasses experience the greatest improvements in vision-related quality of life.

 

Publications

1.    Rah MJ, Walline JJ, Jones-Jordan LA, et al. Vision specific quality of life of pediatric contact lens wearers. Optom Vis Sci. 2010;87(8):560-566.

2.    Jones-Jordan LA, Chitkara M, Coffey B, et al. A comparison of spectacle and contact lens wearing times in the ACHIEVE study. Clin Exp Optom. 2010;93(3):157-163.

3.    Walline JJ, Jones LA, Sinnott L, et al. Randomized trial of the effect of contact lens wear on self-perception in children. Optom Vis Sci. 2009;86(3):222-232.

4.    Walline JJ, Jones LA, Sinnott L, et al. A randomized trial of the effect of soft contact lenses on myopia progression in children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49(11):4702-4706.

5.    Walline JJ, Jones LA, Chitkara M, et al. The Adolescent and Child Health Initiative to Encourage Vision Empowerment (ACHIEVE) study design and baseline data. Optom Vis Sci. 2006;83(1):37-45.

6.    Walline JJ, Long S, Zadnik K. Daily disposable contact lens wear in myopic children. Optom Vis Sci. 2004;81(4):255-259.

 

Funding Source

  • Johnson & Johnson Vision Care Institute

Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study

 

Top Three Results

1. Over eight years, 20% of keratoconus patients develop a new corneal scar

2. The vision-related quality of life of keratoconus patients is similar to patients with category 3-4 age-related macular degeneration

3. Keratoconus patients experience eye pain, regardless of whether or not they wear gas permeable contact lenses

Publications

  1. Rebenitsch RL, Kymes SM, Walline JJ, Gordon MO. The lifetime economic burden of keratoconus: a decision analysis using a Markov model. Am J Ophthalmol. 2011;151(5):768-773 e762.
  2. Fink BA, Sinnott LT, Wagner H, Friedman C, Zadnik K, CLEK Study Group. The influence of gender and hormone status on the severity and progression of keratoconus. Cornea. 2010;29(1):65-72.
  3. Szczotka-Flynn L, Slaughter M, McMahon T, et al. Disease severity and family history in keratoconus. Br J Ophthalmol. 2008;92(8):1108-1111.
  4. Kymes SM, Walline JJ, Zadnik K, Sterling J, Gordon MO, CLEK Study Group. Changes in the quality-of-life of people with keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008;145(4):611-617.
  5. Wagner H, Barr JT, Zadnik K. Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study: methods and findings to date. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2007;30(4):223-232.
  6. Gordon MO, Steger-May K, Szczotka-Flynn L, et al. Baseline factors predictive of incident penetrating keratoplasty in keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;142(6):923-930.
  7. McMahon TT, Szczotka-Flynn L, Barr JT, et al. A new method for grading the severity of keratoconus: the Keratoconus Severity Score (KSS). Cornea. 2006;25(7):794-800.
  8. McMahon TT, Edrington TB, Szczotka-Flynn L, et al. Longitudinal changes in corneal curvature in keratoconus. Cornea. 2006;25(3):296-305.
  9. Davis LJ, Schechtman KB, Wilson BS, et al. Longitudinal changes in visual acuity in keratoconus. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47(2):489-500.
  10. Zadnik K, Barr JT, Steger-May K, et al. Comparison of flat and steep rigid contact lens fitting methods in keratoconus. Optom Vis Sci. 2005;82(12):1014-1021.
  11. Barr JT, Wilson BS, Gordon MO, et al. Estimation of the incidence and factors predictive of corneal scarring in the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study. Cornea. 2006;25(1):16-25.
  12. Fink BA, Wagner H, Steger-May K, et al. Differences in keratoconus as a function of gender. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;140(3):459-468.
  13. McMahon TT, Anderson RJ, Roberts C, et al. Repeatability of corneal topography measurement in keratoconus with the TMS-1. Optom Vis Sci. 2005;82(5):405-415.
  14. Kymes SM, Walline JJ, Zadnik K, Gordon MO, Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus study g. Quality of life in keratoconus. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004;138(4):527-535.
  15. Nichols JJ, Steger-May K, Edrington TB, Zadnik K, group Cs. The relation between disease asymmetry and severity in keratoconus. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004;88(6):788-791.
  16. Edrington TB, Gundel RE, Libassi DP, et al. Variables affecting rigid contact lens comfort in the collaborative longitudinal evaluation of keratoconus (CLEK) study. Optom Vis Sci. 2004;81(3):182-188.
  17. Zadnik K, Steger-May K, Fink BA, et al. Between-eye asymmetry in keratoconus. Cornea. 2002;21(7):671-679.
  18. Shen JF, McMahon TT, Cheng EL, et al. Lysosomal hydrolase staining of conjunctival impression cytology specimens in keratoconus. Cornea. 2002;21(5):447-452.
  19. Szczotka LB, Barr JT, Zadnik K. A summary of the findings from the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study. CLEK Study Group. Optometry. 2001;72(9):574-584.
  20. Raasch TW, Schechtman KB, Davis LJ, Zadnik K, CLEK Study Group. Repeatability of subjective refraction in myopic and keratoconic subjects: results of vector analysis. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2001;21(5):376-383.
  21. McMahon TT, Anderson RJ, Joslin CE, Rosas GA, CLEK Study Topography Analysis Group. Precision of three topography instruments in keratoconus subjects. Optom Vis Sci. 2001;78(8):599-604.
  22. Fink BA, Barr JT, Edrington TB, et al. A comparison of two methods of evaluating cornea-to-contact lens base curve fluorescein patterns in keratoconus. Optom Vis Sci. 2001;78(8):589-598.
  23. Zadnik K, Barr JT, Edrington TB, et al. Corneal scarring and vision in keratoconus: a baseline report from the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study. Cornea. 2000;19(6):804-812.
  24. Barr JT, Zadnik K, Wilson BS, et al. Factors associated with corneal scarring in the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study. Cornea. 2000;19(4):501-507.
  25. Edrington TB, Szczotka LB, Barr JT, et al. Rigid contact lens fitting relationships in keratoconus. Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study Group. Optom Vis Sci. 1999;76(10):692-699.
  26. Barr JT, Schechtman KB, Fink BA, et al. Corneal scarring in the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study: baseline prevalence and repeatability of detection. Cornea. 1999;18(1):34-46.
  27. Davis LJ, Schechtman KB, Begley CG, Shin JA, Zadnik K, CLEK Study Group. Repeatability of refraction and corrected visual acuity in keratoconus. Optom Vis Sci. 1998;75(12):887-896.
  28. Zadnik K, Barr JT, Edrington TB, et al. Baseline findings in the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998;39(13):2537-2546.
  29. Edrington TB, Szczotka LB, Begley CG, et al. Repeatability and agreement of two corneal-curvature assessments in keratoconus: keratometry and the first definite apical clearance lens (FDACL). CLEK Study Group. Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus. Cornea. 1998;17(3):267-277.
  30. Gordon MO, Schechtman KB, Davis LJ, McMahon TT, Schornack J, Zadnik K. Visual acuity repeatability in keratoconus: impact on sample size. Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Keratoconus (CLEK) Study Group. Optom Vis Sci. 1998;75(4):249-257.
  31. Gundel RE, Libassi DP, Zadnik K, et al. Feasibility of fitting contact lenses with apical clearance in keratoconus. Optom Vis Sci. 1996;73(12):729-732.
  32. Edrington TB, Barr JT, Zadnik K, et al. Standardized rigid contact lens fitting protocol for keratoconus. Optom Vis Sci. 1996;73(6):369-375.
  33. Zadnik K, Barr JT, Gordon MO, Edrington TB, CLEK Study Group. Biomicroscopic signs and disease severity in keratoconus. Cornea. 1996;15(2):139-146.

Funding Source

  • National Institutes of Health EY10419, EY10069, EY10077, EY12656, and EY0268

 


CLEERE StudyCollaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Ethnicity and Refractive Error

 

Top Three Results

  1. Time spent outdoors makes you less likely to become nearsighted, but it does not affect the progression of myopia.
  2. Cycloplegic refractive error predicts the onset of myopia as well as a composite of eight factors, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of approximately 0.9.
  3. Hyperopic refractive error greater than +2.50 D in first grade is likely to persist through childhood.

 

Publications

  1. Zadnik K, Sinnott LT, Cotter SA, et al. Prediction of juvenile-onset myopia. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133(6):683-689.
  2. Jones-Jordan LA, Sinnott LT, Graham ND, et al. The contributions of near work and outdoor activity to the correlation between siblings in the Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Ethnicity and Refractive Error (CLEERE) Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55(10):6333-6339.
  3. Jones-Jordan LA, Sinnott LT, Cotter SA, et al. Time outdoors, visual activity, and myopia progression in juvenile-onset myopes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53(11):7169-7175.
  4. Manny RE, Sinnott LT, Jones-Jordan LA, et al. Predictors of adequate correction following vision screening failure. Optom Vis Sci. 2012;89(6):892-900.
  5. Mutti DO, Mitchell GL, Sinnott LT, et al. Corneal and crystalline lens dimensions before and after myopia onset. Optom Vis Sci. 2012;89(3):251-262.
  6. Messer DH, Mitchell GL, Twelker JD, Crescioni M, CLEERE Study Group. Spectacle wear in children given spectacles through a school-based program. Optom Vis Sci. 2012;89(1):19-26.
  7. Manny RE, Mitchell GL, Cotter SA, et al. Intraocular pressure, ethnicity, and refractive error. Optom Vis Sci. 2011;88(12):1445-1453.
  8. Mutti DO, Cooper ME, Dragan E, et al. Vitamin D receptor (VDR) and group-specific component (GC, vitamin D-binding protein) polymorphisms in myopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(6):3818-3824.
  9. Berntsen DA, Sinnott LT, Mutti DO, Zadnik K, CLEERE Study Group. Accommodative lag and juvenile-onset myopia progression in children wearing refractive correction. Vision Res. 2011;51(9):1039-1046.
  10. Jones-Jordan LA, Mitchell GL, Cotter SA, et al. Visual activity before and after the onset of juvenile myopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(3):1841-1850.
  11. Mutti DO, Sinnott LT, Mitchell GL, et al. Relative peripheral refractive error and the risk of onset and progression of myopia in children. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(1):199-205.
  12. Jones-Jordan LA, Sinnott LT, Manny RE, et al. Early childhood refractive error and parental history of myopia as predictors of myopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51(1):115-121.
  13. Twelker JD, Mitchell GL, Messer DH, et al. Children's Ocular Components and Age, Gender, and Ethnicity. Optom Vis Sci. 2009;86(8):918-935.
  14. Mutti DO, Hayes JR, Mitchell GL, et al. Refractive error, axial length, and relative peripheral refractive error before and after the onset of myopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48(6):2510-2519.
  15. Mutti DO, Mitchell GL, Hayes JR, et al. Accommodative lag before and after the onset of myopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47(3):837-846.
  16. Zadnik K, Manny RE, Yu JA, et al. Ocular component data in schoolchildren as a function of age and gender. Optom Vis Sci. 2003;80(3):226-236.
  17. Zadnik K, Jones LA, Irvin BC, et al. Myopia and ambient night-time lighting. CLEERE Study Group. Collaborative Longitudinal Evaluation of Ethnicity and Refractive Error. Nature. 2000;404(6774):143-144.
  18. Shin JA, Manny RE, Kleinstein RN, Mutti DO, Zadnik K. Short-term repeatability of hand-held keratometry measurements. Optom Vis Sci. 1999;76(4):247-253.

Funding Sources

National Institutes of Health EY08893