ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2026
Psychometric Performance of Children With Amblyopia During a Tablet-Based Adaptive Visual Acuity Assessment.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Visual acuity is a key metric for the diagnosis of amblyopia. Here, we introduce a self-administered near visual acuity (VA) test using the Angular Indication Measurement paradigm (AIM-VA) and evaluate it in children with and without amblyopia. Methods: Thirty-five children (age range, 5-16 years; 20 males) with (n = 22) and without (n = 13) amblyopia monocularly completed the AIM-VA twice within the same day and a Snellen-VA test. The AIM-VA presented three 4 × 4 charts of Landolt-C optotypes that adaptively varied in size and had randomized gap orientations. Orientation report errors as a function of optotype size were fit with a one-parameter (VA) model or a three-parameter (VA, slope, and response error) model. Bland-Altman analysis assessed test-retest repeatability and intertest agreement with Snellen-VA. Linear correlations and leave-one-out analyses explored relationships between psychometric parameters across groups and amblyopia subtypes. Results: Interocular acuity difference (IOD) was significantly larger in children with amblyopia than in controls for both AIM-VA and Snellen-VA. The one-parameter AIM-VA yielded repeatability comparable to previous reports, particularly in the amblyopic group, and showed no significant test-retest bias (P > 0.05). However, there was a systematic mean bias of lower logMAR estimates relative to Snellen-VA in the amblyopic group (P = 0.002), likely reflecting the difference in testing distance and task. Exploratory analysis revealed that shallower psychometric slopes were consistently associated with larger noise values across groups, with stronger parameter covariance in refractive than strabismic amblyopia. Conclusions: AIM-VA successfully detected amblyopic near-vision IOD. The one-parameter AIM-VA model showed no retest bias and comparable variance in this pediatric population. Exploratory psychometric parameters showed promise as additional indicators of functional deficits, with potential phenotypical differences between amblyopia subtypes warranting further investigation. AIM-VA is an adaptive, self-administered task that may be an effective tool for managing amblyopia.
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.