ArticleJournal of optometry
Toward developing a standardized Arabic continuous text reading chart.
Article in Journal of optometry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Arabic Reading Performance With a Chromatic Acuity Chart.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNear visual acuity is an essential measurement during an oculo-visual assessment. Short duration continuous text reading charts measure reading acuity and other aspects of reading performance. There is no standardized version of such chart in Arabic. The aim of this study is to create sentences of equal readability to use in the development of a standardized Arabic continuous text reading chart.
methodsInitially, 109 Arabic pairs of sentences were created for use in constructing a chart with similar layout to the Colenbrander chart. They were created to have the same grade level of difficulty and physical length. Fifty-three adults and sixteen children were recruited to validate the sentences. Reading speed in correct words per minute (CWPM) and standard length words per minute (SLWPM) was measured and errors were counted. Criteria based on reading speed and errors made in each sentence pair were used to exclude sentence pairs with more outlying characteristics, and to select the final group of sentence pairs.
resultsForty-five sentence pairs were selected according to the elimination criteria. For adults, the average reading speed for the final sentences was 166 CWPM and 187 SLWPM and the average number of errors per sentence pair was 0.21. Childrens' average reading speed for the final group of sentences was 61 CWPM and 72 SLWPM. Their average error rate was 1.71.
conclusionsThe reliability analysis showed that the final 45 sentence pairs are highly comparable. They will be used in constructing an Arabic short duration continuous text reading chart.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.