Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36416367›Full record

Trial reportOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2023

Is critical flicker-fusion frequency a valid measure of visual fatigue? A post-hoc analysis of a double-masked randomised controlled trial.

Sumeer Singh, Laura E Downie, Andrew J Anderson

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Immediate Effects of Light Mode and Dark Mode Features on Visual Fatigue in Tablet Users.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Trial
  2. Is critical flicker-fusion frequency a valid measure of visual fatigue? A post-hoc analysis of a double-masked randomised controlled trial.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2023
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sumeer SinghDepartment of Optometry and Vision Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3519-7037
Laura E DownieDepartment of Optometry and Vision Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1596-2259
Andrew J AndersonDepartment of Optometry and Vision Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7015-0061
The University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCritical flicker-fusion frequency (CFF) has been used in clinical studies as a measure of visual fatigue. We examine the correlation between CFF and subjective reports of visual fatigue in a group of symptomatic computer users, to consider whether CFF may be used as a surrogate measure of visual fatigue symptoms.

methodsWe analysed data from a previous randomised controlled trial. One hundred and twenty adults, diagnosed with computer vision syndrome, had CFF and visual fatigue symptoms quantified before and after a visually demanding 2-h computer task. Symptoms were assessed using a questionnaire with nine subcomponents that summed to a total score of 900. CFF was measured using a two-interval forced-choice method, with the flicker rate altered by a computer-controlled staircase procedure. For our primary analysis, we determined Spearman correlation coefficients between post-task symptom scores and CFF, and between change from baseline symptom scores and CFF. We also used a bootstrap procedure to consider whether symptom score subcomponents were significantly (Bonferroni-corrected) different from overall scores with regard to their correlations with CFF.

resultsAlthough visual fatigue symptom scores altered significantly post-task (mean change: 92 units; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 11 to 122), CFF did not (mean change -0.7 Hz; 95% CI: -1.7 to 0.3). There was no significant correlation between overall symptom scores and CFF, either for the post-task (r = -0.13; 95% CI: -0.31 to 0.05) or the change from baseline (r = -0.18; 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.01) analysis. Subcomponents of the symptom questionnaire did not show a significant correlation with CFF, either for the post-task or the change from baseline analysis.

conclusionsWe find that CFF is not a useful surrogate for symptoms of visual fatigue, given its low correlation with scores on a visual fatigue symptom questionnaire.

Indexed as

AsthenopiaFlicker FusionAdultDouble-Blind MethodHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesVisual Acuityasthenopiacomputer vision syndromecritical flicker-fusion frequencydigital eye straineye strainvisual fatigue

Identifiers

PMID36416367
PMCPMC10100408
OpenAlexW4309789954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.