ArticleInternational ophthalmology2025
Diagnostic performance of color vision tests for color vision deficiency: a network meta-analysis on comparisons of multiple color vision tests.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Computerized Full-Color Assessment for Distinguishing Color Vision Deficiency.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis network meta-analysis (NMA) was done to compare the performance of color vision tests in the detection of individuals with color vision deficiency (CVD).
methodsMedline (via PubMed), Embase, and Web of Science were comprehensively searched from inception of the databases to 17 January, 2023. Conventional meta-analysis of diagnostic indicators was performed. The superiority of a diagnostic approach was depicted using the Superiority (S) Index.
resultsSix studies were enrolled. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under the curve of summary receiver operating characteristic of the Ishihara tests were 0.89 (0.81, 0.94), 0.99 (0.96, 1.00), 110.8 (18.1, 677.0), 0.10 (0.05, 0.20), 1105 (112, 10,930), and 0.98 (0.96, 0.99). Waggoner Computerized Color Vision Test ranked the best performance in the detection of CVD, followed by CAD test, Ishihara test, Fletcher Lantern test, and HHR test as the rest second to the fifth most effective modalities.
conclusionThis NMA revealed that CAD test, Ishihara test, Fletcher Lantern test, and HHR test had favorable diagnostic validity in the detection of CVD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40419813What 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.