Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33774817›Full record

ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2021

An implementation of Bubble Magnification did not improve the video comprehension of individuals with central vision loss.

Francisco M Costela, Stephanie M Reeves, Russell L Woods

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
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

3 authors.

Francisco M CostelaSchepens Eye Research Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3530-6224
Stephanie M ReevesSchepens Eye Research Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Russell L WoodsSchepens Eye Research Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7193-1211

Funding

VISION RESEARCHP30EY003790 · NEI · SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI Patricia Ann D'Amore · 1985 to 2026
$25.5M
Watching Television and Movies with Low VisionR01EY019100 · NEI · SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI WOODS, RUSSELL LAURENCE · 2010 to 2016
$3.5M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY003790NEI NIH HHS R01 EY019100
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePeople with central vision loss (CVL) watch television, videos and movies, but often report difficulty and have reduced video comprehension. An approach to assist viewing videos is electronic magnification of the video itself, such as Bubble Magnification.

methodsWe created a Bubble Magnification technique that displayed a magnified segment around the centre of interest (COI) as determined by the gaze of participants with normal vision. The 15 participants with CVL viewed video clips shown with 2× and 3× Bubble Magnification, and unedited. We measured video comprehension and gaze coherence.

resultsVideo comprehension was significantly worse with both 2× (p = 0.01) and 3× Bubble Magnification (p < 0.001) than the unedited video. There was no difference in gaze coherence across conditions (p ≥ 0.58). This was unexpected because we expected a benefit in both video comprehension and gaze coherence. This initial attempt to implement the Bubble Magnification method had flaws that probably reduced its effectiveness.

conclusionsIn the future, we propose alternative implementations of Bubble Magnification, such as variable magnification and bubble size. This study is a first step in the development of an intelligent-magnification approach to providing a vision rehabilitation aid to assist people with CVL.

Indexed as

ComprehensionVision, LowHumansMotion PicturesScotomalow visionvideo comprehensionvideo enhancement

Identifiers

PMID33774817
PMCPMC8217304

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.