Back

Adherence to Red Reflex and Vision Screening Recommendations: A Deep Dive into Primary Care Implementation Gaps

Asare, A. O.; Robles, G.; Hartmann, E. E.; Stipelman, C.; Calder, D.; Omotowa, O.; Montgomery, J.; Baugh, B. T.; Stagg, B.; Del Fiol, G.; Watt, M. H.; Hribar, M. R.; Smith, J.

2026-06-16 pediatrics
10.64898/2026.06.08.26355190 medRxiv
Show abstract

Introduction: Early childhood vision screening is critical for detecting amblyopia and other vision-threatening conditions. Despite screening recommendations during well-child visits, rates remain low. Red reflex assessment is recommended to identify serious ocular pathology, yet its use in primary care is not well described. We examined rates and drivers of vision screening in pediatric primary care. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of electronic health records for children 3 to 5 years attending well-child visits in 2022 in one of three representative primary care clinics within a university health system. Outcomes were documented red reflex and functional vision tests. We evaluated associations with patient demographics and clinic site using multivariable logistic regression Results: Among 1,003 visits, 21.1% (n=212) had a documented red reflex assessment, and 60.8% (n=610) a functional vision test. Younger children (ages 3 and 4 vs. 5 years) had higher odds of red reflex assessment [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 9.00 and 8.64], and lower odds of a functional vision (aOR 0.47 and 0.59) test. Females had higher odds of red reflex assessment (aOR 1.53). Other/Multiracial children had lower odds of red reflex assessment than Non-Hispanic White children (aOR 0.48). Screening rates varied significantly by clinic site Conclusions: Visual function and red reflex assessment are inconsistently performed in pediatric primary care, with particularly low rates of red reflex documentation. Screening rates varied between clinics and were affected by age. These findings highlight missed opportunities for early detection of vision-threatening conditions and identify targets for improving adherence to pediatric vision screening recommendations

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 10%
18.6%
2
BMJ Paediatrics Open
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.6%
3
The Journal of Pediatrics
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.8%
50% of probability mass above
4
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 4%
6.3%
5
Pediatrics
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.9%
6
Archives of Disease in Childhood
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.4%
7
PLOS Global Public Health
344 papers in training set
Top 4%
4.1%
8
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
9
Children
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
10
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
11
Frontiers in Pediatrics
32 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.5%
12
BMC Health Services Research
51 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
13
Annals of Epidemiology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
14
Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
15
American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A
17 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
16
Medicine
31 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
17
Cureus
68 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
18
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
19
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 73%
0.9%
20
JAMA Pediatrics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
21
Pediatric Neurology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
22
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
235 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%