Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40938075›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2025

Advancing vision standards in aviation: Embracing evidence-based approaches.

Allison Lynch, Ewa Niechwiej-Szwedo, Shi Cao, Suzanne Kearns, Elizabeth Irving

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Allison LynchSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Ewa Niechwiej-SzwedoKinesiology and Health Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Shi CaoSystems Design Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Suzanne KearnsGeography and Environmental Management, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Elizabeth IrvingSchool of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study explores the relationship between visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and pilot performance in simulated flight scenarios, including poor weather conditions, attempting to determine minimum visual requirements for safe flight. Twenty-six participants with normal or corrected-to-normal vision and varying flight experience (0-400 flight hours) completed simulated flight circuits under different weather conditions (e.g., rain, wind) using either Cambridge Simulation Glasses or defocusing lenses to degrade vision. Flight performance was assessed subjectively by an instructor using standardized criteria and objectively via simulator data. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity were measured at each level of visual degradation. Mixed model analysis of variance revealed significant differences in the variability of vertical speed, pitch, roll, and the slope of altitude descent as a function of vision degradation level and weather conditions. There was also a significant main effect of vision degradation type (scatter or defocus) on the slope of altitude descent. Post hoc analyses indicated flight performance was first affected at 1.0 and 1.3 logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution degradation with scattering and defocusing lenses, respectively. These results suggest that current vision standards should potentially be reevaluated for them to be more based on evidence.

Indexed as

Aerospace MedicineAviationContrast SensitivityVisual AcuityAdultComputer SimulationEvidence-Based MedicineEyeglassesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedWeatherYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40938075
PMCPMC12439511

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.