Table 1.
Comparison of demographic, visual and functional performance among subtypes of SEN [median (IQR) or percentage].
Fig 1.
Relationship between visual acuity, visual processing functions (visual orientation (VO, N = 81), facial expression cards (FEC, N = 74), and facial expression examiner (FEE, N = 67), and dynamic balance function (time-up-go [TUG], N = 81).
VO, FEC, and FEE were associated with habitual near acuity, while TUG was associated with habitual distance acuity.
Fig 2.
Relationship between distance visual acuity and static balance measures.
Upper row: Medial-lateral sway (ML); Lower row: Antero-posterior sway (AP). Feet-together stance condition was denoted by F (left column, N = 52) while tandem stance condition was denoted by T (right column, N = 52). Open symbols indicate eye-open condition, while filled symbols indicate eye-closed condition. Statistical significance in Fisher’s r-to-z transformation indicates the different correlation coefficients.
Table 2.
Results of multiple linear regressions for static balance measures.
Fig 3.
Relationship between visual processing functions and chronological age, stratified by visual acuity and subtypes of SEN.
Filled symbols indicate students with visual acuity < LogMAR 0.50 (NV), while dotted symbols indicate students with visual acuity ≥ LogMAR 0.50 (VI). Circle: Cerebral palsy (CP); Triangle: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD); Square: Down syndrome (DS); Diamond: Isolated intellectual disability (ID); Hexagon: Other disabilities.