ReviewEye (London, England)2024
A history of visual acuity testing and optotypes.
Review in Eye (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Astaxanthin (AstaRealAdvances in therapy · 2025Trial
- Differences in Contrast Sensitivity Measurement With Letters and Gratings.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Article
- Description and Evaluation of a Visual Acuity Assessment Paradigm Based on Spatial Frequency-Modulated Form Discrimination.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Early Real-World Outcomes with a Novel Hybrid Full Range of Vision Intraocular Lens.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Advancing Ocular Safety Profile Assessment: A Novel Grading Scale for Ocular Adverse Reactions Associated with Bemarituzumab.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Article
- Visual Acuity Among Portuguese School-Aged Population.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- VisualR: A novel and scalable solution for assessing visual function using virtual reality.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
After going into the etymology of the word "optotype", this article covers some tasks in ancient times that required good visual acuity (VA). Around 300 BCE, Euclid formulated the existence of a visual cone with a minimal visual angle at its tip. Trials to test VA appeared AD 1754. Around that time, texts were introduced by opticians in order to be able to prescribe more reliably. In the early nineteenth century, the need for VA tests in ophthalmology resulted in German and English test charts. Numerous variants emerged after the first edition of Snellen's optotypes in 1862 in The Netherlands. However, 100 years later there was still no standard optotype to reliably test VA. Multidisciplinary approaches between ophthalmology, linguistics, psychology and psychophysics improved optotypes and VA testing, which led to the more reliable LogMAR charts. Recent advances in aids and therapies for the blind and severely visually handicapped, necessitate further development of new and standardized VA tests.
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.