ArticleOphthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina2022
A Smartphone-Based Near-Vision Testing System: Design, Accuracy, and Reproducibility Compared With Standard Clinical Measures.
Article in Ophthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- User-Centred Design and Development of a Smartphone Application (Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Development and Evaluation of a New Self-Administered Near Visual Acuity Chart: Accuracy and Feasibility of Usage.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveOphthalmologic telemedicine has emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of this study is to assess the accuracy and reproducibility of a smartphone-based home vision monitoring system (Sightbook) and to compare it with existing clinical standards. PATIENTS AND
methodsNear Snellen visual acuity (VA) was measured with Sightbook and compared with conventional measurements for distance and near VA at an academic medical center ophthalmology clinic in 200 patients with a variety of different specified preexisting ocular conditions. Measurements of contrast sensitivity were also compared by using an existing commercially available chart system in 15 normal patients and 15 patients with age-related macular degeneration.
resultsSightbook VA tests were reproducible (SD = ±0.054 logMAR), and correlation with standard VA methods was significant (
conclusionsSmartphone-based VA and contrast sensitivity are highly correlated with standard charts and may be useful in augmenting limited inoffice care.
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.