ArticleOphthalmology science2022
Validation of the New York University Langone Eye Test Application, a Smartphone-Based Visual Acuity Test.
Article in Ophthalmology science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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 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.
Impact of ODYSight in the Management of patientS With imparairEd Visual acuitY (ODYSSEY).
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validity and Reliability of WHOeyes Application in Community-based Visual Acuity Screening Program.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social Medicine · 2026Article
- Smart Devices in Optometry: Current and Future Perspectives to Clinical Optometry.Clinical optometry · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To validate and assess user satisfaction and usability of the New York University (NYU) Langone Eye Test application, a smartphone-based visual acuity (VA) test. Design: Mixed-methods cross-sectional cohort study. Participants: Two hundred forty-four eyes of 125 participants were included. All participants were adults 18 years of age or older. Participants' eyes with a VA of 20/400 (1.3 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution [logMAR]) or worse were excluded. Methods: Patients were tested using the clinical standard Rosenbaum near card and the NYU Langone Eye Test application on an iPhone and Android device. Each test was performed twice to measure reliability. Ten patients were selected randomly for subsequent semistructured qualitative interviews with thematic analysis. Main Outcome Measures: Visual acuity was the parameter measured. Bland-Altman analysis was used to measure agreement between the results of the NYU Langone Eye Test application and Rosenbaum card, as well as test-retest reliability of each VA. The correlation between results was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Satisfaction survey and semistructured interview questions were developed to measure usability and acceptability. Results: Bland-Altman analysis revealed an agreement between the application and the Rosenbaum near card of 0.017 ± 0.28 logMAR (iPhone) and 0.009 ± 0.29 logMAR (Android). The correlation between the application and the Rosenbaum near card was 0.74 for both the iPhone and Android. Test-retest reliability was 0.003 ± 0.22 logMAR (iPhone), 0.01 ± 0.25 logMAR (Android), and 0.01 ± 0.23 logMAR (Rosenbaum card). Of the 125 participants, 97.6% found the application easy to use, and 94.3% were overall satisfied with the application. Thematic analysis yielded 6 key themes: (1) weaknesses of application, (2) benefits of the application, (3) tips for application improvement, (4) difficulties faced while using the application, (5) ideal patient for application, and (6) comparing application with traditional VA testing. Conclusions: The NYU Langone Eye Test application is a user-friendly, accurate, and reliable measure of near VA. The application's integration with the electronic health record, accessibility, and easy interpretation of results, among other features, make it ideal for telemedicine use.
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.