ArticleJMIR formative research2023
The Accuracy of a Web-Based Visual Acuity Self-assessment Tool Performed Independently by Eye Care Patients at Home: Method Comparison Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy and reliability of self-administered visual acuity tests: Systematic review of pragmatic trials.PloS one · 2023Pooled it
- 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
- Real world data on digital remote refraction in a healthy population of 14,680 eyes.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Web-based vs. conventional: a comprehensive analysis of visual acuity assessment using the PocDoc tool in a tertiary eye care centre.Eye (London, England) · 2024Observational
- Development and Evaluation of a New Self-Administered Near Visual Acuity Chart: Accuracy and Feasibility of Usage.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- The Role of Ophthalmology in Tele-Stroke Consults for Triaging Acute Vision Loss.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2024Article
- The TeleTriageTeam, Offering Continuity of Personalized Care Through Telemedicine: Development and Evaluation.JMIR human factors · 2023Article
- Design and Validation of a Novel Smartphone-Based Visual Acuity Test: The K-VA Test.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- Remote follow-up after cataract surgery (CORE-RCT): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.BMC ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTelehealth solutions can play an important role in increasing access to eye care. Web-based eye tests can enable individuals to self-assess their visual function remotely without the assistance of an eye care professional. A web-based tool for self-assessing visual acuity (VA) has previously been studied in controlled, supervised conditions. The accuracy of this tool when performed independently by patients in their home environment, using their own devices, has not yet been examined.
objectiveThe objective of this paper was to examine the accuracy of a web-based tool with respect to measuring VA in ophthalmic patients in their home environment, compared with a conventional in-hospital assessment using a Snellen chart (the gold standard).
methodsFrom April through September 2020, consecutive adult patients with uveitis at the University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands, performed the web-based VA test at home (the index test) before their upcoming conventional VA assessment at the hospital (the reference test). The agreement between the 2 tests was assessed by the Bland-Altman analysis. Additional analyses were performed to investigate associations between clinical characteristics and the accuracy of the web-based test.
resultsA total of 98 eyes in 59 patients were included in the study. The difference in VA between the index and reference tests was not significant, with a mean difference of 0.02 (SD 0.12) logMAR (P=.09) and 95% limits of agreement of -0.21 to 0.26 logMAR. The majority of the differences (77%) fell within the predetermined acceptable deviation limit of 0.15 logMAR. In addition, no patient characteristics or clinical parameters were found to significantly affect the accuracy of the web-based test.
conclusionsThis web-based test for measuring VA is a valid tool for remotely assessing VA, also when performed independently by patients at home. Implementation of validated web-based tools like this in the health care system may represent a valuable step forward in revolutionizing teleconsultations and can provide individual patients with the opportunity to self-monitor changes in VA. This is particularly relevant when the patient's access to ophthalmic care is limited. Future developments should focus on optimizing the testing conditions at home to reduce outliers.
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.