ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2021
Evaluation of stereoacuity with a digital mobile application.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of smartphone technology for detection of paediatric ocular diseases-a systematic review.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Pooled it
- Assessment of visual function using mobile Apps.Eye (London, England) · 2024Review
- Article
- The eRDS v6 Stereotest and the Vivid Vision Stereo Test: Two New Tests of Stereoscopic Vision.Translational vision science & technology · 2023Article
- Clinical Utility of Smartphone Applications in Ophthalmology: A Systematic Review.Ophthalmology scienceReview
- Percentile curves of stereacuity in a Spanish paediatric population.Journal of optometryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeStereopsis is a fundamental skill in human vision and visual actions. There are many ways to test and quantify stereoacuity: traditional paper and new digital applications are both valid ways to test the stereoacuity. The aim of this study is to compare the results obtained using standard tests and the new Stereoacuity Test App developed by the University of Bergamo.
methodsA group of 497 children (272 males), aged between 6 and 11 years old, were tested using different tests for the quantification of stereopsis at near. These tests were TNO, Weiss EKW, and the new developed Stereoacuity Test App.
resultsA one-way repeated measure ANOVA showed that the three tests give different thresholds of stereoacuity (p < 0.0001). Post hoc analyses with Bonferroni correction showed that all tests showed different thresholds (p < 0.0001). The lower threshold was obtained by Titmus Stereo Test followed by Stereoacuity App, Weiss MKW, and TNO.
conclusionThe stereoacuity based on global stereopsis showed that the better values were obtained in order by Stereoacuity Test App, TNO, and Weiss EKW. However, the clinical significance of their values is similar. The new digital test showed a greater compliance by the child, showing itself in tune with the digital characteristics of today's children.
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.