CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 10Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesOphthalmology and Visual Health ResearchRetinal Imaging and Analysis

Automated determination of distance visual acuity: towards teleophthalmology services

Kumar, Sajeesh, Bulsara, Max, Yogesan, Kanagasingam·2008·Clinical and Experimental Optometry
DOI 10.1111/j.1444-0938.2008.00267.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the visual acuity scores of a computer-based visual function testing (CVFT) system. The automated chart uses logMAR notation (logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution) and randomised tilting E as optotype. The test was conducted using a laptop computer. METHODS: This prospective, clinic-based, test validation study was based on a model of repeatability in two observations. The right eyes of a total of 104 participants were randomly tested with both CVFT and the manual, gold standard Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart. RESULTS: The mean difference between CVFT and ETDRS was -0.01+/-0.11 (SD) logMAR units. The Spearman Rank correlation coefficient (r) between the absolute difference and the average was 0.35. The average time for testing one eye was 54.7+/-11.89 seconds. The mean difference between two consecutive, repeated CVFT tests in the same eye was 0.02+/-0.07 logMAR units (paired t-test p=0.046). CONCLUSIONS: A novel, automated visual acuity testing application is reported. This automated system should be a useful tool for mass screening of visual impairment in rural and remote regions with its ease of use and shorter testing time.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1444-0938.2008.00267.x

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Fundamental acuity testing has been seen as a suitable candidate for remote delivery using computer-based tools.

    “Fundamental acuity testing has been seen as a suitable candidate for remote delivery using computer-based tools [57], and it has been shown to deliver performance comparable to that of human testers [58].”

    From Recent directions in telemedicine: Review of trends in research and practice (2015) · cites this paper as [57]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kumar, S., Bulsara, M., & Yogesan, K.
Affiliations
  • Lions Eye Institute (AU)
  • The University of Western Australia (AU)
  • Centre of Excellence in e‐Medicine, Lions Eye Institute, University of Western Australia, Nedlands WA, Australia
Corresponding author
Kumar, Sajeesh
ORCID
Bulsara, Max
Venue
Clinical and Experimental Optometry
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2008-11-01
Volume
91
Issue
6
Pages
545-550
ISSN
  • 0816-4622 (ISSN-L)
  • 1444-0938
DOI
10.1111/j.1444-0938.2008.00267.x
OpenAlex
W1998357415
Cited by
10
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 2495 d)
Locations
  • Clinical and Experimental Optometry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline@ND (The University of Notre Dame) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Ophthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ophthalmology and Visual Health Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal Imaging and Analysis
Keywords
teleophthalmology, logMAR, ETDRS chart, test-retest repeatability, visual impairment screening
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Child, Child, Preschool, Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted, Distance Perception, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Ophthalmology, Prospective Studies, Rural Population, Vision Disorders, Vision Tests, Visual Acuity, Reproducibility of Results, Remote Consultation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review