This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Randomized Controlled Trial  • Ophthalmological Disorders, Other  • Patient-Physician Relationship/ Care  • Treatment Adherence  • Drug Therapy  • Adherence  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In reply

We are pleased to read that Dr Jethani values our past and ongoing efforts to investigate the effectiveness of vision therapy using rigorous scientific methodology and welcome the opportunity to respond to the issues raised in his letter.

He expressed concern that there was a great disparity in treatment time or dosage between home-based pencil push-ups and office-based vision therapy/orthoptics and calculated a difference of 60 hours between the 2 groups. His calculations are inaccurate. The home-based pencil push-ups group performed 15 minutes of treatment, 5 days per week. This yielded 75 minutes of treatment per week for 12 weeks or 15 total hours. The office-based vision therapy/orthoptics group also performed 15 hours of home therapy over the course of 12 weeks, but also received 12 hours of office-based treatment (1 hour per week) for a total of 27 hours; not the 75 hours incorrectly calculated by Dr . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Mitchell Scheiman, OD; G. Lynn Mitchell, MS; Susan Cotter, OD; Jeffrey Cooper, OD, MS; Marjean Kulp, OD, MS; Michael Rouse, OD, MS; Eric Borsting, OD, MS; Richard London, MS, OD; Janice Wensveen, OD, PhD; the Convergence Insufficiency Treatment Trial (CITT) Study Group

RELATED ARTICLE

Convergence Insufficiency: Randomized Clinical Trial
Jitendra Jethani
Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123(12):1760.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT