Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Poor visual acuity and its negative effects on agricultural profitability.

The effects are derived from Kandel et al. (6), themes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Theme 2 was excluded because it deals exclusively with the negative effects of wearing glasses, contact lenses and corrective surgery. Source: Own depiction.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Data description for selected variables.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Raw results from the standardized eye examination.

Number of observations = 260. Displayed are the average values from both eyes. Source: Own depiction.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Results from the standardized vision test by visual acuity group.

Number of observations = 260. Source: Own depiction.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 2.

Calculations of contribution margins.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Mean comparison of key variables for the good vision and poor vision groups.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Estimates from the PSM (treatment = good vision) with a probit model.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Covariate balance for the good vision and poor vision groups before and after MDM.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

ATT comparison between good vision and poor vision groups with PSM and MDM.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

ATT’s for MDM, KBM and NNM with upper and lower bound comparison groups.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Fig 4.

Results from OLS regression on gross margins, with visual acuity groups as independent factorial variable.

Total observations = 260. Reference group is visual acuity group with a visus of 0. Control variables are not displayed. Source: Own depiction.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 8.

Treatment effects of visual acuity on single factor productivity.

More »

Table 8 Expand