Chopin · Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) 2019 · evidence synthesis review · n=?

The prevalence and diagnosis of 'stereoblindness' in adults less than 60 years of age: a best evidence synthesis.

Cited 49 times in the scientific literature.

Level 5 - mechanism / opinion, no new human data

Narrative review and best evidence synthesis of observational prevalence data without formal meta-analytic pooling.

PubMed 30776852 · doi:10.1111/opo.12607 · record verified 2026-08-27

What was done

The authors conducted a best-evidence synthesis reviewing how stereopsis (depth perception from binocular disparity) is measured across psychophysical and clinical tests. They evaluated how different diagnostic criteria and testing conditions influence stereoblindness detection and synthesized historical prevalence data in adults younger than 60 years of age across four analytical frameworks.

What was found

All four synthesis approaches yielded an identical estimated stereoblindness prevalence of 7% in adults under 60 years old: the median approach (7%), the unambiguous-stereoblindness-criteria approach (7%), the visual-defect-included approach (7%), and the multiple-criteria approach (7%).

Why it matters

Stereoblindness impairs depth-dependent tasks such as distance estimation, but prior prevalence estimates varied widely due to inconsistent test modalities. Demonstrating that multiple analytical approaches converge on a 7% rate provides a clear baseline prevalence for younger and middle-aged adult populations.

Limits

The abstract does not state the number of studies or total participant sample size included in the synthesis. Results are explicitly restricted to adults younger than 60, excluding older populations where prevalence is likely higher. Diagnostic variability across different stereotests remains a major source of heterogeneity.

Cited by