ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2025
Accuracy and precision of a sphero-cylindrical over-refraction app for smartphones.
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 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Utilization of a self-refracting system on the streets to improve vision in an urban unhoused population.BMC ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Myopia Prescription Based on Smartphone App: A Feasibility Study in Africa.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Accuracy and precision of a sphero-cylindrical over-refraction app for smartphones.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025Article
- Innovative myopic screening platform based on smartphones.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Optometrist-guided versus self-driven subjective refraction using tunable optics: quantifying the professional's impact.Journal of optometryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the accuracy and precision of a web-based smartphone app designed to measure sphero-cylindrical over-refraction.
methodsA total of 307 healthy young subjects (22.5 ± 3.4 years) underwent clinical subjective refraction. In addition to each subject's refractive correction, spherical and cylindrical errors from -1.50 to 0.00 D were randomly induced so that their sum did not exceed -2.50 D, thereby generating a clinical over-refraction. Seven different IOS and Android-based smartphones were used. A new app showing tripole rescaling stimuli in blue or red light was used. Each subject used one smartphone to measure their induced over-refraction subjectively, obtaining an app over-refraction finding. Differences between the app and clinical over-refraction were analysed across 675 values.
resultsThe mean difference between the app and clinical over-refraction in terms of power vector components ± limits of agreement was 0.17 ± 0.84 D for M (p < 0.0001), 0.01 ± 0.42 D (p = 0.28) for J
conclusionsThe accuracy and precision of the over-refraction obtained by the app was slightly lower than standard clinical subjective refraction in terms of inter-examiner repeatability and comparable to measurements obtained using objective methods. The app shows the potential to perform sphero-cylindrical over-refractions reliably.
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.