ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2025
Exploring standard and low luminance visual acuity and the Moorfields Acuity Chart as outcome measures in inherited retinal disease.
Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 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.
- Natural History of Macular Sensitivity in Best Vitelliform Macular Dystrophy: Microperimetry-Derived Outcome Measures in Preparation For Clinical Trials.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionStandard visual acuity (VA) is often insensitive to subtle changes in vision that result from inherited retinal disease. Low luminance VA (LLVA) has grown in popularity as an alternative acuity measure. A new test, the Moorfields Acuity Chart (MAC) has been designed as a more sensitive and repeatable test for use in patients with age-related macular degeneration. The study explores the utility and repeatability of standard VA, LLVA and the MAC in a mixed cohort of patients with inherited retinal disease.
methodsParticipants were recruited as part of the visual function in retinal degeneration study (Ethics Reference 20/WM/0283). Standard VA was obtained using the Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy study (ETDRS) chart placed at 4 m. LLVA was obtained using the same ETDRS chart with the addition of a 2.0-log unit neutral density filter. MAC VA was obtained using standard clinic room lighting. All participants completed repeated testing.
resultsThirty-five patient participants and 36 healthy controls, with logMAR 1.00 (6/60) or better, completed testing. Both LLVA and MAC VA were reduced compared to standard VA in patient participants and healthy controls (linear mixed model: p < 0.001). All three acuity tests show comparable sensitivity, specificity and repeatability. A subset of participants (patient participants n = 34, healthy controls n = 35) completed microperimetry. Post hoc analysis of microperimetry volume sensitivity correlated significantly with all of the acuity tests and showed no significant difference in the gradient of the slopes. This suggests that VA, LLVA and MAC VA decline at a consistent rate with disease progression.
conclusionAll three acuity tests could be considered viable outcome measures for clinical trials. For patients with early to moderate inherited retinal disease (logMAR 1.00 (6/60) or better), no single acuity chart appeared significantly beneficial.
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.