Observational studyDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2026
Validation of a novel multi-luminance shape discrimination test for assessment of functional vision.
Observational study in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn low-vision patients, traditional measures often fall short of capturing functional vision improvements. The study aims to assess the reliability and validity of a novel functional low-vision outcome assessment, the Multi-luminance Shape Discrimination Test (MLSDT).
methodsThis is a prospective, observational study in 25 participants with severe vision loss due to retinitis pigmentosa (RP) with visual acuity worse than or equal to LogMAR 1.6, and in 10 normal vision participants. The MLSDT utilizes three differently shaped objects, randomly positioned on pressure sensors, to enable an automated, quantifiable response in a controlled multi-luminance environment. The assessment accuracy (recognizing the correct object and picking it up) was measured using the MLSDT. Convergent validity of MLSDT was evaluated with measures of visual acuity and visual field, as well as patient-reported outcomes.
resultsThe 35 study participants (60% male and 40% female) had a mean age of 46.5 years old (range: 19-78 years), with 24 Hispanic individuals. Estimates of test-retest reliability for MLSDT exceeded 0.50. The correlations between MLSDT test scores and LogMAR visual acuity were strong (> -0.7). For a difference of 0.3 LogMAR between the groups of RP participants, a decrease of ~ 2-level MLSDT score was observed. Moderate to strong correlations were also observed between MLSDT test scores and the measures of visual field and patient-reported outcome measures.
conclusionPsychometric evaluation demonstrates the reliability and validity of the novel functional vision endpoint, MLSDT. The MLSDT test performance in participants with different visual acuities showed improved object recognition when the luminance level was enhanced.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41826528What 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.