Department of Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins Wilmer Eye Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Center for Eye Policy and Innovation University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2021 Aug;28(4):293-300. doi: 10.1080/09286586.2020.1846758. Epub 2020 Nov 13.
: Recent innovations in mobile technology for the measurement of vision present a valuable opportunity to measure visual function in non-clinical settings, such as in the home and in field-based surveys. This study evaluated agreement between a tablet-based measurement of distance and near acuity and contrast sensitivity as compared to gold-standard clinical tests.: Participants aged ≥55 years recruited from a tertiary eye clinic underwent testing with three tablet-based and corresponding gold-standard clinical measures (ETDRS distance acuity, Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity, and MNRead near acuity). Correlation and agreement between tablet-based and clinical tests were assessed.: A total of 82 participants with a mean age of 69.1 (SD = 7.6) years, and majority female (67.1%) and white (64.6%), were enrolled in this study. The mean (SD) difference between the tests (gold-standard - tablet) was -0.04 (0.08) logMAR for distance acuity, -0.11 (0.13) log units for contrast sensitivity, and -0.09 (0.12) logMAR for near acuity. 95% limits of agreement for distance acuity (-0.21, 0.12 logMAR), near acuity (-0.34, 0.14 logMAR), and contrast sensitivity (-0.36, 0.14 logCS) were also determined. The correlation between tablet-based and gold-standard tests was strongest for distance acuity (r = 0.78), followed by contrast sensitivity (r = 0.75), and near acuity (r = 0.67). The agreement between the standard and tablet-based methods did not appear to be dependent on the level of vision.: This study demonstrates the agreement of tablet-based and gold-standard tests of visual function in older adults. These findings have important implications for future population vision health surveillance and research.
: 最近移动技术在视觉测量方面的创新为在非临床环境（如家庭和现场调查）中测量视觉功能提供了宝贵的机会。本研究评估了基于平板电脑的远距离和近距离视力及对比敏感度测量值与金标准临床测试之间的一致性。: 在一家三级眼科诊所招募了年龄≥55 岁的参与者，他们接受了三种基于平板电脑的测试和相应的金标准临床测试（ETDRS 远距离视力、Pelli-Robson 对比敏感度和 MNRead 近距离视力）。评估了基于平板电脑和临床测试之间的相关性和一致性。: 这项研究共纳入了 82 名平均年龄为 69.1（标准差=7.6）岁的参与者，其中大多数为女性（67.1%）和白人（64.6%）。测试（金标准-平板电脑）之间的平均（标准差）差值为远距离视力-0.04（0.08）logMAR，对比敏感度-0.11（0.13）log 单位，近距离视力-0.09（0.12）logMAR。还确定了远距离视力（-0.21，0.12 logMAR）、近距离视力（-0.34，0.14 logMAR）和对比敏感度（-0.36，0.14 logCS）的 95%一致性界限。平板电脑和金标准测试之间的相关性最强的是远距离视力（r=0.78），其次是对比敏感度（r=0.75），然后是近距离视力（r=0.67）。标准和基于平板电脑的方法之间的一致性似乎不依赖于视力水平。: 本研究证明了基于平板电脑和金标准的老年人大视力功能测试的一致性。这些发现对未来的人口视力健康监测和研究具有重要意义。
