Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37733350›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2023

Validation of the Waterloo Differential Visual Acuity Test (WatDAT) and Comparison With Existing Pediatric Tests of Visual Acuity.

Victor Opoku-Yamoah, Lisa W Christian, Elizabeth L Irving, Deborah Jones, Daphne McCulloch, Kalpana Rose, Susan J Leat

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. The Waterloo Differential Acuity Test (WatDAT)-Testability and normative data.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025
    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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Victor Opoku-YamoahSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Lisa W ChristianSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Elizabeth L IrvingSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Deborah JonesSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Daphne McCullochSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Kalpana RoseSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Susan J LeatSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
University of Waterloo · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The new Waterloo Differential Acuity Test (WatDAT) is designed to allow recognition visual acuity (VA) measurement in children before they can typically undertake matching tests. The study purpose was to validate WatDAT in adults with normal and reduced VA. Methods: Eighty adults (18 to <40 years of age) participated (32 normal VA, 12 reduced VA, and 36 simulated reduced VA). Monocular VA was measured on two occasions in random order for WatDAT (versions with 3 and 5 distractors for Faces and Patti Pics house among circles), Lea Symbols, Kay Pictures and Patti Pics matching tests, Teller Acuity Cards, Cardiff Acuity Test, and Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) letter chart. Pediatric tests were validated against ETDRS using limits of agreement (LoA), sensitivity, and specificity. The LoA for repeatability were also determined. Results: WatDAT showed minimal bias compared with ETDRS, and LoAs, which were similar to pediatric matching tests (0.241-0.250). Both preferential looking tests showed higher bias and LoAs than ETDRS. Matching tests showed good agreement with ETDRS, except for Kay Pictures and Lea Uncrowded test, which overestimated VA. WatDAT showed high sensitivity (>0.96) and specificity (>0.79), which improved with criterion adjustment and were significantly higher than for the preferential looking tests. LoA for repeatability for WatDAT 3 Faces and WatDAT 5 Faces were comparable with the ETDRS. Conclusions: WatDAT demonstrates good agreement and repeatability compared with the gold-standard ETDRS letter chart, and performed better than preferential looking tests, the alternative until a child can undertake a matching VA test. Translational Relevance: Good validity of the Waterloo Differential Acuity Test was demonstrated in adults as a first step to showing its potential for detecting childhood visual disorders.

Indexed as

Diabetic RetinopathyVision TestsAdultChildHumansResearch DesignVisual Acuity

Identifiers

PMID37733350
PMCPMC10517421
OpenAlexW4386910369

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.