-
Graefe's Archive For Clinical and... Aug 2017A new generation of logarithmic reading charts has sparked interest in standardized reading performance analyses. Such reading charts have been developed according to... (Review)
Review
A new generation of logarithmic reading charts has sparked interest in standardized reading performance analyses. Such reading charts have been developed according to the standards of the International Council of Ophthalmology. The print size progression in these calibrated charts is in accordance with the mathematical background of EN ISO 8596. These reading charts are: the Bailey-Lovie Word Reading Chart, the Colenbrander English Continuous Text Near Vision Cards, the Oculus Reading Probe II, the MNREAD Charts, the SKread Charts, and the RADNER Reading Charts. The test items used for these reading charts differ among the charts and are standardized to various extents. The Bailey-Lovie Charts, MNREAD Charts, SKread Charts, and RADNER Charts are also meant to measure reading speed and allow determination of further reading parameters such as reading acuity, reading speed based on reading acuity, critical print size, reading score, and logMAR/logRAD ratio. Such calibrated reading charts have already provided valuable insights into the reading performance of patients in many research studies. They are available in many languages and thus facilitate international communication about near visual performance. In the present review article, the backgrounds of these modern reading charts are presented, and their different levels of test-item standardization are discussed. Clinical research studies are mentioned, and a discussion about the immoderately high number of reading acuity notations is included. Using the logReading Acuity Determination ([logRAD] = reading acuity equivalent of logMAR) measure for research purposes would give reading acuity its own identity as a standardized reading parameter in ophthalmology.
Topics: Humans; Language; Ophthalmology; Reading; Vision Tests; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 28411305
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-017-3659-0 -
Acta Ophthalmologica Sep 2021
Review
A novel excel sheet conversion tool from Snellen fraction to LogMAR including 'counting fingers', 'hand movement', 'light perception' and 'no light perception' and focused review of literature of low visual acuity reference values.
Topics: Humans; Reference Values; Statistics, Nonparametric; Vision Disorders; Vision Tests; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 33326177
DOI: 10.1111/aos.14659 -
Translational Vision Science &... Dec 2020To evaluate the test-retest reliability and validity of the MNREAD test for use in children with vision impairment (VI) and to compare their performance on the test to...
PURPOSE
To evaluate the test-retest reliability and validity of the MNREAD test for use in children with vision impairment (VI) and to compare their performance on the test to that of normally sighted children.
METHODS
Children with VI ( = 62) and without VI ( = 40) were administered the MNREAD test and the Basic Reading Inventory (BRI) on two study visits, 1 to 3 weeks apart. The maximum reading rate, critical print size, and reading acuity were determined for the MNREAD test, and test-retest reliability was evaluated. The reading rate for the MNREAD test was compared to the BRI results.
RESULTS
Strong correlations between visits were found for all MNREAD parameters (0.68-0.99). Older, but not younger, children with VI read significantly more slowly on both the MNREAD and the BRI than children with normal vision ( < 0.05). Reading rates between the two tests were strongly correlated ( = 0.88). For the MNREAD test, the reading rate increased 4.4 words per minute (wpm) per year for VI and 10.6 wpm/y for those with normal vision. For the BRI, the reading rate increased by 5.9 wpm/y for VI and 9.7 wpm/y for those with normal vision. Poorer visual acuity was associated with slower reading rates on the MNREAD test but not on the BRI, as the MNREAD relies largely on visual factors but the BRI also relies on linguistic and grammar skills.
CONCLUSIONS
The MNREAD test are reliable and valid for use in children with vision impairment.
TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE
The MNREAD test can be utilized by clinicians, as they are a quick, easy-to-administer method for evaluating reading vision in children with VI.
Topics: Child; Humans; Reading; Reproducibility of Results; Vision Tests; Vision, Low; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 33384883
DOI: 10.1167/tvst.9.13.25 -
Clinical & Experimental Optometry Jul 2004The structure and function of the available and significant clinical colour vision tests are reviewed in the light of the needs in the clinical examination of congenital... (Review)
Review
The structure and function of the available and significant clinical colour vision tests are reviewed in the light of the needs in the clinical examination of congenital and acquired colour vision deficiencies. The tests are grouped and described as pseudo-isochromatic plates, arrangement tests, matching tests and vocational tests. The colorimetric constructions of the test types are described and the efficiency of their performance and usefulness discussed. Recommendations are made for basic and extended test batteries, when examining of congenital and acquired colour vision deficiencies in the consulting room.
Topics: Color Perception Tests; Color Vision Defects; Equipment Design; Humans
PubMed: 15312031
DOI: 10.1111/j.1444-0938.2004.tb05057.x -
Traffic Injury Prevention 2013In this article, we review the impact of vision on older people's night driving abilities. Driving is the preferred and primary mode of transport for older people. It is... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
In this article, we review the impact of vision on older people's night driving abilities. Driving is the preferred and primary mode of transport for older people. It is a complex activity where intact vision is seminal for road safety. Night driving requires mesopic rather than scotopic vision, because there is always some light available when driving at night. Scotopic refers to night vision, photopic refers to vision under well-lit conditions, and mesopic vision is a combination of photopic and scotopic vision in low but not quite dark lighting situations. With increasing age, mesopic vision decreases and glare sensitivity increases, even in the absence of ocular diseases. Because of the increasing number of elderly drivers, more drivers are affected by night vision difficulties. Vision tests, which accurately predict night driving ability, are therefore of great interest.
METHODS
We reviewed existing literature on age-related influences on vision and vision tests that correlate or predict night driving ability.
RESULTS
We identified several studies that investigated the relationship between vision tests and night driving. These studies found correlations between impaired mesopic vision or increased glare sensitivity and impaired night driving, but no correlation was found among other tests; for example, useful field of view or visual field. The correlation between photopic visual acuity, the most commonly used test when assessing elderly drivers, and night driving ability has not yet been fully clarified.
CONCLUSIONS
Photopic visual acuity alone is not a good predictor of night driving ability. Mesopic visual acuity and glare sensitivity seem relevant for night driving. Due to the small number of studies evaluating predictors for night driving ability, further research is needed.
Topics: Aged; Aging; Automobile Driving; Color Vision; Contrast Sensitivity; Glare; Humans; Mesopic Vision; Night Vision; Psychomotor Performance; Vision Tests; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 23683029
DOI: 10.1080/15389588.2012.727510 -
Journal of AAPOS : the Official... Apr 2022To evaluate a newly developed, web-based system for at-home pediatric visual acuity testing and to compare results with standard in-office visual acuity test results.
PURPOSE
To evaluate a newly developed, web-based system for at-home pediatric visual acuity testing and to compare results with standard in-office visual acuity test results.
METHODS
Children aged 3-12 years with and without visual deficits were enrolled (N = 65; 130 eyes). Monocular visual acuity was tested in-office using the ATS-HOTV (ages 3-6) or E-ETDRS (ages 7-12) protocol. Each child's family was emailed a link to a web-based version of the same visual acuity test for at-home testing. Equivalence was evaluated by using a linear mixed model to estimate the mean difference between in-office and at-home visual acuity test results and the corresponding two-sided 95% confidence interval.
RESULTS
For children tested with the ATS-HOTV protocol, the mean difference between in-office and at-home visual acuity test results was 0.01 log MAR (95% CI, -0.06 to 0.09). For children tested with the E-ETDRS protocol, the mean difference was 0.04 log MAR (95% CI, -0.06 to 0.14).
CONCLUSIONS
At-home, web-based ATS-HOTV and E-ETDRS visual acuity test results had excellent concordance with in-office visual acuity testing. If the burden of travel is significant, at-home testing of children's visual acuity may provide the information needed to continue care when it might otherwise be discontinued or delayed.
Topics: Child; Humans; Internet; Reproducibility of Results; Vision Tests; Visual Acuity
PubMed: 34920136
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaapos.2021.11.007 -
Vision Research Sep 2013Despite significant changes in the treatment of common eye conditions like cataract and age-related macular degeneration, reading difficulty remains the most common... (Review)
Review
Despite significant changes in the treatment of common eye conditions like cataract and age-related macular degeneration, reading difficulty remains the most common complaint of patients referred for low vision services. Clinical reading tests have been widely used since Jaeger introduced his test types in 1854. A brief review of the major developments in clinical reading tests is provided, followed by a discussion of some of the main controversies in clinical reading assessment. Data for the Salisbury Eye Evaluation (SEE) study demonstrate that standardised clinical reading tests are highly predictive of reading performance under natural, real world conditions, and that discrepancies between self-reported reading ability and measured reading performance may be indicative of people who are at a pre-clinical stage of disability, but are at risk for progression to clinical disability. If measured reading performance is to continue to increase in importance as a clinical outcome measure, there must be agreement on what should be measured (e.g. speed or comprehension) and how it should be measured (e.g. reading silently or aloud). Perhaps most important, the methods for assessing reading performance and the algorithms for scoring reading tests need to be optimised so that the reliability and responsiveness of reading tests can be improved.
Topics: Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Predictive Value of Tests; Reading; Reproducibility of Results; Vision Tests; Vision, Low
PubMed: 23506967
DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2013.02.015 -
Translational Vision Science &... Mar 2023To describe two new stereoacuity tests: the eRDS v6 stereotest, a global dynamic random dot stereogram (dRDS) test, and the Vivid Vision Stereo Test version 2 (VV), a...
PURPOSE
To describe two new stereoacuity tests: the eRDS v6 stereotest, a global dynamic random dot stereogram (dRDS) test, and the Vivid Vision Stereo Test version 2 (VV), a local or "contour" stereotest for virtual reality (VR) headsets; and to evaluate the tests' reliability, validity compared to a dRDS standard, and learning effects.
METHODS
Sixty-four subjects passed a battery of stereotests, including perceiving depth from RDS. Validity was evaluated relative to a tablet-based dRDS reference test, ASTEROID. Reliability and learning effects were assessed over six sessions.
RESULTS
eRDS v6 was effective at measuring small thresholds (<10 arcsec) and had a moderate correlation (0.48) with ASTEROID. Across the six sessions, test-retest reliability was good, varying from 0.84 to 0.91, but learning occurred across the first three sessions. VV did not measure stereoacuities below 15 arcsec. It had a weak correlation with ASTEROID (0.27), and test-retest reliability was poor to moderate, varying from 0.35 to 0.74; however, no learning occurred between sessions.
CONCLUSIONS
eRDS v6 is precise and reliable but shows learning effects. If repeated three times at baseline, this test is well suited as an outcome measure for testing interventions. VV is less precise, but it is easy and rapid and shows no learning. It may be useful for testing interventions in patients who have no global stereopsis.
TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE
eRDS v6 is well suited as an outcome measure to evaluate treatments that improve adult stereodepth perception. VV can be considered for screening patient with compromised stereovision.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Reproducibility of Results; Vision Tests; Depth Perception; Dystonic Disorders
PubMed: 36857068
DOI: 10.1167/tvst.12.3.1 -
Journal of Biomedical Optics Jun 2015We proposed a glasses-free randot stereotest using a multiview display system. We designed a four-view parallax barrier system and proposed the use of a random-dot...
We proposed a glasses-free randot stereotest using a multiview display system. We designed a four-view parallax barrier system and proposed the use of a random-dot multigram as a set of view images for the glasses-free randot stereotest. The glasses-free randot stereotest can be used to verify the effect of glasses in a stereopsis experience. Furthermore, the proposed system is convertible between two-view and four-view structures so that the motion parallax effect could be verified within the system. We discussed the design principles and the method used to generate images in detail and implemented a glasses-free randot stereotest system with a liquid crystal display panel and a customized parallax barrier. We also developed graphical user interfaces and a method for their calibration for practical usage. We performed experiments with five adult subjects with normal vision. The experimental results show that the proposed system provides a stereopsis experience to the subjects and is consistent with the glasses-type randot stereotest and the Frisby–Davis test. The implemented system is free from monocular cues and provides binocular disparity only. The crosstalk of the system is about 6.42% for four-view and 4.17% for two-view, the time required for one measurement is less than 20 s, and the minimum angular disparity that the system can provide is about 23 arc sec.
Topics: Adult; Depth Perception; Equipment Design; Humans; User-Computer Interface; Vision Tests
PubMed: 26057031
DOI: 10.1117/1.JBO.20.6.065004 -
Translational Vision Science &... Dec 2020Visual prostheses aim to restore, at least to some extent, vision that leads to the type of perception available for sighted patients. Their effectiveness is almost...
UNLABELLED
Visual prostheses aim to restore, at least to some extent, vision that leads to the type of perception available for sighted patients. Their effectiveness is almost always evaluated using clinical tests of vision. Clinical vision tests are designed to measure the limits of parameters of a functioning visual system. I argue here that these tests are rarely suited to determine the ability of prosthetic devices and other therapies to restore vision. This paper describes and explains many limitations of these evaluations. Prosthetic vision testing often makes use of multiple-alternative forced-choice (MAFC) procedures. Although these paradigms are suitable for many studies, they are frequently problematic in vision restoration evaluation. Two main types of problems are identified: (1) where nuisance variables provide spurious cues that can be learned in repeated training, which is common in prosthetic vision, and thus defeat the purpose of the test; and (2) even though a test is properly designed and performed, it may not actually measure what the researchers believe, and thus the interpretation of results is wrong. Examples for both types of problems are presented. Additional problems arise from confounding factors in the administration of tests are pointed as limitations of current device evaluation. For example, head tracing of magnified objects enlarged to compensate for the system's low resolution, in distinction from the scanning head (camera) movements with which users of prosthetic devices expand the limited field of view. Because of these problems, the ability to perform satisfactorily on the clinical tests is necessary but insufficient to prove vision restoration, therefore, additional tests are needed. I propose some directions to pursue in such testing.
TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE
Numerous prosthetic devices are being developed and introduced to the market. Proving the utility of these devices is crucial for regulatory and even for post market acceptance, which so far has largely failed, in my opinion. Potential reasons for the failures despite success in regulatory testing and directions for designing improved testing are provided. It is hoped that improved testing will guide improved designs of future prosthetic systems and other vision restoration approaches.
Topics: Humans; Movement; Vision Tests; Vision, Ocular; Visual Prosthesis
PubMed: 33384886
DOI: 10.1167/tvst.9.13.32