Suppr超能文献

苹果iPad作为即时阅读放大镜的有效性。

Effectiveness of the Apple iPad as a Spot-reading Magnifier.

作者信息

Wittich Walter, Jarry Jonathan, Morrice Elliott, Johnson Aaron

机构信息

School of Optometry, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

CRIR/Centre de réadaptation MAB-Mackay du CIUSSS du Centre-Ouest-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

出版信息

Optom Vis Sci. 2018 Sep;95(9):704-710. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001269.

Abstract

SIGNIFICANCE

There are no data available comparing the iPad as a portable magnification device with a portable video magnifier. Our study supports the use and integration of mainstream tablet computers into vision rehabilitation to overcome potential barriers to device uptake due to the stigma attached to traditional devices.

PURPOSE

Portable personal tablet computers have taken on an important role as assistive devices for individuals with visual impairment; however, their use is rarely supported by independent data. Our study aims to contribute to evidence-based practice by comparing a tablet computer with a portable video magnifier in their use as spot-reading devices.

METHODS

We compared the Optelec Compact 5 HD portable video magnifier (Optelec, Longueuil, Canada) and the Apple iPad Air tablet computer (Apple Inc, Cupertino, CA) using the SuperVision+ Magnifier app by asking 60 adults with low vision (age range, 19 to 97 years; mean visual acuity, 20/136) to spot read information on a bill, a medication box, and a food label. Their ability to complete each task was timed; they completed the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology questionnaire and indicated their preferred device.

RESULTS

Performance speed indicated that easier tasks were completed faster; however, there were no statistically significant differences in performance between the two device conditions. The highest satisfaction scores for both devices were identical: dimensions, ease of use, and effectiveness. Preference between the two devices was split at 25 for iPad, 33 for the portable closed-circuit television, and 2 for undecided.

CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate that performance speed on our spot-reading tasks was comparable across the two devices. In addition, subjective judgment of the device features and personal preferences lead us to conclude that both the iPad and the portable magnifier may have certain equivalence in their functionality, depending on the user and the task for which they are used.

摘要

意义

目前尚无将iPad作为便携式放大设备与便携式视频放大镜进行比较的数据。我们的研究支持将主流平板电脑用于视力康复,以克服因传统设备带来的污名化而导致的设备采用潜在障碍。

目的

便携式个人平板电脑已成为视障人士的重要辅助设备;然而,其使用情况很少有独立数据支持。我们的研究旨在通过比较平板电脑和便携式视频放大镜作为点读设备的使用情况,为循证实践做出贡献。

方法

我们让60名低视力成年人(年龄范围19至97岁;平均视力20/136)使用SuperVision+ Magnifier应用程序,比较了Optelec Compact 5 HD便携式视频放大镜(加拿大隆格伊的Optelec公司)和苹果iPad Air平板电脑(加利福尼亚州库比蒂诺的苹果公司),让他们点读账单、药盒和食品标签上的信息。记录他们完成每项任务的时间;他们完成了魁北克辅助技术用户满意度调查问卷,并指出了他们更喜欢的设备。

结果

表现速度表明,较简单的任务完成得更快;然而,两种设备条件下的表现没有统计学上的显著差异。两种设备的最高满意度得分相同:尺寸、易用性和有效性。两种设备的偏好情况是:25人选择iPad,33人选择便携式闭路电视,2人未决定。

结论

结果表明,在我们的点读任务中,两种设备的表现速度相当。此外,对设备功能的主观判断和个人偏好使我们得出结论,iPad和便携式放大镜在功能上可能具有一定的等效性,这取决于用户及其使用的任务。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9c67/6133231/928d45070754/opx-95-704-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验