Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37744537›Full record

ReviewIranian journal of public health2023

Digital Display Preference of Electronic Gadgets for Visual Comfort: A Systematic Review.

Nurulain Muhamad, Nurul Amira Nor Amali

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Iranian journal of public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Nurulain MuhamadCenter of Optometry, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universiti Teknologi MARA Cawangan Selangor, 42300 Bandar Puncak Alam, Selangor, Malaysia.
Nurul Amira Nor AmaliWHOOSH Southkey, 80150 Johor Bharu, Johor, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Digital devices such as smartphones, tablets, computers, and laptops are used for various purposes. The digital display quality has been improved, making it less tiring and more favoured among users. This study aimed to review the visual comfort of digital devices and the preferences of digital display settings that enhance the visual comfort experienced by digital device users. Methods: A search of PubMed, EBSCO host MEDLINE Complete, Scopus database, Google Scholar, and manual citation review was conducted, covering the period between 2010 and 2022. The criteria were selected based on the PRISMA statements. The search mainly focused on finding the existing literature on digital devices that contribute to visual discomfort and digital device settings that provide better visual comfort. Results: The database search resulted in 533 references via the application of Microsoft Excel. There were 28 studies included in the final assessment. Twelve studies accounted for digital devices that contributed to visual discomfort, while another sixteen studies for digital device settings provided better visual comfort. Conclusion: Digital displays with high luminance contrast, positive polarity and adequate colour were preferred for better visual comfort. Meanwhile, smaller fonts were preferred for desktops and laptops, while larger fonts were favoured for smartphones. This study provides insights for digital display developers to learn and improve their display technology to fit the preferences expressed.

Indexed as

Color contrastDigital devicesDisplay polarityFont sizeLuminance contrastVisual comfort

Identifiers

PMID37744537
PMCPMC10512131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.