Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33380619›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2021

Validation of visual acuity applications for teleophthalmology during COVID-19.

PremNandhini Satgunam, Monika Thakur, Virender Sachdeva, Sneha Reddy, Padmaja Kumari Rani

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Validation and evaluation of visual acuity and contrast sensitivity with a new digital device: OPTOTAB®.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025
    Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Applications and Current Medico-Legal Challenges of Telemedicine in Ophthalmology.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
  16. Analysis of COVID-19 publications in theIndian journal of ophthalmology · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

PremNandhini SatgunamBrien Holden Institute of Optometry and Vision Sciences, Hyderabad Eye Research Foundation, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.
Monika ThakurBrien Holden Institute of Optometry and Vision Sciences, Hyderabad Eye Research Foundation, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.
Virender SachdevaChild Sight Institute, Nimmagadda Prasad Children's Eye Care Centre, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Visakhapatnam, India.
Sneha ReddyCenter for Innovation, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.
Padmaja Kumari RaniHead, Teleophthalmology (LVPEI Network), Smt. Kanuri Santhamma Centre for Vitreo-Retinal Diseases, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe objective of this study was to identify and validate smartphone-based visual acuity (VA) apps that can be used in a teleophthalmology portal.

methodsThe study was conducted in three phases: A survey to investigate if the SmartOptometry App was easy to download, understand and test (phase I), an in-clinic comparison of VA measured in a random testing order with four tools namely COMPlog, Reduced Snellen near vision, Peek Acuity (Distance VA) and SmartOptometry (Near VA) (phase II) and a repeatability study on these 4 tools by measuring VA again (phase III). The study recruited the employees of our institute and adhered to the strict COVID-19 protocols of testing.

resultsPhase I Survey (n = 40) showed 90% of participants used android phones, 60% reported that instructions were clear, and all users were able to self-assess their near VA with SmartOptometry App. Phase II (n = 68) revealed that Peek Acuity was comparable to COMPlog VA (P = 0.31), however SmartOptometry was statistically significantly different (within 2 log MAR lines) from Reduced Snellen near vision test, particularly for young (n = 44, P = 0.004) and emmetropic (n = 16, P = 0.04) participants. All the 4 tests were found to be repeatable in phase III (n = 10) with a coefficient of repeatability ≤0.14.

conclusionSmartphone-based apps were easy to download and can be used for checking patient's distance and near visual acuity. An effect of age and refractive error should be considered when interpreting the results. Further studies with real-time patients are required to identify potential benefits and challenges to solve.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsVisual AcuityAdultAgedComorbidityCOVID-19FemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedOphthalmologyPandemicsProspective StudiesRefractive ErrorsReproducibility of ResultsSmartphonetele-ophthalmologytele-optometryvision testingvisual acuity Apps

Identifiers

PMID33380619
PMCPMC7933864

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.