ReviewOphthalmology and therapy2021
Digital Tools for the Self-Assessment of Visual Acuity: A Systematic Review.
Review in Ophthalmology and therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT06076785 (Impact of ODYSight in the Management of patientS With imparairEd Visual acuitY), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 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.
Impact of ODYSight in the Management of patientS With imparairEd Visual acuitY (ODYSSEY).
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accuracy and reliability of self-administered visual acuity tests: Systematic review of pragmatic trials.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- Optimising the patient pathway for macular conditions requiring intravitreal injections.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Development and Clinical Validation of an Artificial Intelligence-Based Automated Visual Acuity Testing System.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a tele-refraction model to address the lack of human resources in Kenya.PloS one · 2026Article
- Enhancing access and clinical triage in primary eye care through digital vision testing: validation of the SightConnect mobile application.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Article
- 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) · 2025Article
- Seeing the unseen: uncovering health-related social needs through universal screening at an academic ophthalmology practice.Eye (London, England) · 2025Article
- Remote web-based self-assessment of visual acuity versus ETDRS in patients with macular diseases: a method comparison study.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2025Article
- Assessment of Emergency Department Intraocular Pressure and Visual Acuity Assessment as a Screening Exam.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Patient Experiences with PocDoc, a Web-Based Eye Screening Tool.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2024Article
- Development and Evaluation of a New Self-Administered Near Visual Acuity Chart: Accuracy and Feasibility of Usage.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Smart Devices in Optometry: Current and Future Perspectives to Clinical Optometry.Clinical optometry · 2024Review
- Inter-Rater Reliability of EyeSpy Mobile for Pediatric Visual Acuity Assessments by Parent Volunteers.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Long-term outcomes of intravenous fibrinolysis in central retinal artery occlusion.Scientific reports · 2023Observational
- Design and Validation of a Novel Smartphone-Based Visual Acuity Test: The K-VA Test.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- The Perspective of mHealth in the Self-Assessment of the Parkinson's Disease. Comment on Kalafati et al. Testing of Motor Coordination in Degenerative Neurological Diseases.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The Accuracy of a Web-Based Visual Acuity Self-assessment Tool Performed Independently by Eye Care Patients at Home: Method Comparison Study.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Development and Validation of a Digital (Peek) Near Visual Acuity Test for Clinical Practice, Community-Based Survey, and Research.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Article
- Analysis of the Reliability and Repeatability of Distance Visual Acuity Measurement with EyeSpy 20/20.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNumerous digital tools to self-assess visual acuity have been introduced. The recent COVID-19 pandemic underlined the need for high-quality remote care. This review gives a current overview of digital tools for remotely assessing visual function and reports on their accuracy.
methodsWe searched the databases of Embase and Pubmed, and systematically reviewed the literature, conforming to PRISMA guidelines. Two preliminary papers were added from medRxiv.org. The main outcome was the agreement of the digital tools with conventional clinical charts, as expressed by mean differences and 95% limits of agreement (95% LoA).
resultsSeventeen publications included studies reported on 13 different digital tools. Most of the tools focus on distance visual acuity. The mean differences of the digital tools ranged from - 0.08 to 0.10 logMAR, when compared to traditional clinical assessments. The 95% LoA differed considerably between studies: from ± 0.08 logMAR to ± 0.47 logMAR, though the variability was less pronounced for higher visual acuities.
conclusionThe low mean differences between digital visual acuity assessments and reference charts suggest clinical equivalence, though the wide 95% LoA identify a lower precision of digital self-assessments. This effect diminishes in individuals with better visual acuities, which is a common feature of visual acuity assessments. There is great potential for the digital tools to increase access to eye care and we expect the accuracy of the current tools to improve with every iteration in technology development.
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.