ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2020
Refinement and preliminary evaluation of two tablet-based tests of real-world visual function.
Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Utility of 'Peekaboo Vision' Application for Measuring Grating Acuity in Children with Down Syndrome.The British and Irish orthoptic journal · 2022Article
- Refinement and preliminary evaluation of two tablet-based tests of real-world visual function.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2020Article
- Novel computer-based assessments of everyday visual function in people with age-related macular degeneration.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo describe, refine, evaluate, and provide normative control data for two freely available tablet-based tests of real-world visual function, using a cohort of young, normally-sighted adults.
methodsFifty young (18-40 years), normally-sighted adults completed tablet-based assessments of (1) face discrimination and (2) visual search. Each test was performed twice, to assess test-retest repeatability. Post-hoc analyses were performed to determine the number of trials required to obtain stable estimates of performance. Distributions were fitted to the normative data to determine the 99% population-boundary for normally sighted observers. Participants were also asked to rate their comprehension of each test.
resultsBoth tests provided stable estimates in around 20 trials (~1-4 min), with only a further reduction of 14%-17% in the 95% Coefficient of Repeatability (CoR
conclusionsThis preliminary assessment indicated that both tablet-based tests are able to provide simple, quick, and easy-to-administer measures of real-world visual function in normally-sighted young adults. Further work is required to assess their accuracy and utility in older people and individuals with visual impairment. Potential applications are discussed, including their use in clinic waiting rooms, and as an objective complement to Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs).
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.