Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30415314›Full record

ArticleJapanese journal of ophthalmology2019

Establishment of a normative database and evaluation of the test-retest repeatability of the Spaeth/Richman contrast sensitivity test.

Lalita Gupta, Michael Waisbourd, Carina T Sanvicente, Michael Hsieh, Sheryl S Wizov, Eric E Spaeth, Jesse Richman, George L Spaeth

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Japanese journal of ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Spaeth/Richman Contrast Sensitivity in Staging Glaucoma.Translational vision science & technology · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Lalita GuptaMount Sinai Hospital, New York, USA.
Michael WaisbourdDepartment of Ophthalmology, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Carina T SanvicenteGlaucoma Research Center, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA.
Michael HsiehNew York College of Podiatric Medicine, New York, USA.
Sheryl S WizovGlaucoma Research Center, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA. swizov@willseye.org.
Eric E SpaethIndependent contributor, Philadelphia, USA.
Jesse RichmanGlaucoma Research Center, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA.
George L SpaethGlaucoma Research Center, Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA.
Wills Eye Hospital · USMount Sinai Hospital · USNew York College of Podiatric Medicine · USTel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center · IL

Funding

Partridge Foundation PRT13001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the test-retest repeatability of a computer-based contrast sensitivity (CS) test, the Spaeth/Richman contrast sensitivity (SPARCS) test, and to determine the effects of age and lens status on CS in normal eyes. STUDY

designProspective cross-sectional study.

methodsThe participants were assessed by use of the SPARCS test in each eye 3 times. The first 2 sessions were supervised, while the third was unsupervised. CS was determined for 5 areas of vision (central, superotemporal, superonasal, inferotemporal, and inferonasal) and combined to provide a total score. The test-retest repeatability was determined using Bland-Altman analysis and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

resultsThe total SPARCS scores (maximum possible score = 100) ranged from 86.37 (±1.09) (for those aged 20 to 29 years) to 70.71 (±2.64) (for those aged 80 to 87 years). Individuals aged between 10 and 87 years with a normal eye examination (n = 205) were enrolled. When the SPARCS scores for the first 2 sessions were compared, the ICC was 0.79, and the repeated tests were fairly equivalent (mean difference = -0.29, P = .491). The test-retest 95% limits of agreement (95% LoA) ranged from -11.07 to +11.35. When the supervised sessions were compared with the unsupervised session, the ICC was 0.80, and there was slight improvement in the CS scores during the unsupervised session (mean difference = -1.15, P = .0001). The test-retest 95% LoA ranged from -9.18 to +10.60. The CS declined with advanced age and increased cataract severity (P <0.0001).

conclusionStrong agreement was found between repeated SPARCS scores. Older age and increased lens opacity were associated with decline in CS in 5 areas of the visual field. The SPARCS test provides reliable and reproducible assessment of CS in normal eyes.

Indexed as

Visual AcuityVisual FieldsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCataractChildContrast SensitivityCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesCataractContrast sensitivityHealthy participantsNormative databaseRepeatability

Identifiers

PMID30415314
OpenAlexW2899699312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.