Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39292468›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2024

Estimating Visual Acuity Without a Visual Acuity Chart.

Yueh-Hsun Wu, Deyue Yu, Judith E Goldstein, MiYoung Kwon, Micaela Gobeille, Emily Watson, Luc Waked, Rachel Gage, Chun Wang, Gordon E Legge

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2024. 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
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Screening Questions to Identify Low Vision and Acuity-Defined Legal Blindness.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026
    Article
  2. 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

10 authors.

Yueh-Hsun WuCollege of Optometry, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Deyue YuCollege of Optometry, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Judith E GoldsteinWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
MiYoung KwonDepartment of Psychology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA.
Micaela GobeilleThe New England College of Optometry, Boston, MA, USA.
Emily WatsonCollege of Optometry, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Luc WakedCollege of Optometry, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Rachel GageDepartment of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Chun WangMeasurement and Statistics, College of Education, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Gordon E LeggeDepartment of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Funding

PSYCHOPHYSICS OF READING: NORMAL AND LOW VISIONR01EY002934 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES · PI LEGGE, GORDON E · 1985 to 2018
$5.8M
Efficient Assessment of Visual Deficits in Low VisionR01EY025658 · NEI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI YU, DEYUE · 2016 to 2020
$1.9M
Perceptual mechanisms underlying reading difficulties in glaucomaR01EY027857 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI KWON, MIYOUNG · 2017 to 2021
$1.8M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY002934NEI NIH HHS R01 EY025658NEI NIH HHS R01 EY027857
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This study explored whether visual acuity (VA) can be inferred from self-reported ability to recognize everyday objects using a set of yes/no questions. Methods: Participants answered 100 yes/no questions designed to assess their ability to recognize familiar objects at typical viewing distances, such as distinguishing between a full moon and a half moon on a clear night. The questions demanded VA ranging from normal to severe vision impairment. Responses were analyzed using item response theory, and the results were compared with participants' VA values. Results: We recruited 385 participants from 4 sites in the United States. Participants had a mean age of 56.7 years with VA ranging from -0.3 to 2.0 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) (mean = 0.58). A strong relationship was observed between participants' estimated vision ability and their VA (r = -0.72). The linear relationship can be used to predict each participant's VA based on their estimated vision ability. The average signed and unsigned prediction errors were 0 and 0.24 logMAR, respectively, with a coefficient of repeatability of 0.59 logMAR between the estimated VA and measured VA. The same linear function was used to determine the VA limit required for each question. For instance, the VA limit for the moon question was 1.0 logMAR. Conclusions: Yes/no questions about everyday visual activities have the potential to estimate an individual's VA. Future refinements may enhance reliability. Translational Relevance: The survey provides insights into the real-world visual capabilities of people with low vision, making it potentially useful for telehealth applications.

Indexed as

Vision TestsVisual AcuityAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSelf ReportSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39292468
PMCPMC11412607

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.