Suppr超能文献

视力自我评估的数字工具:一项系统综述

Digital Tools for the Self-Assessment of Visual Acuity: A Systematic Review.

作者信息

Claessens Janneau L J, Geuvers Judith R, Imhof Saskia M, Wisse Robert P L

机构信息

Department of Ophthalmology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3508 GX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Faculty of Medicine, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Ophthalmol Ther. 2021 Dec;10(4):715-730. doi: 10.1007/s40123-021-00360-3. Epub 2021 Jun 25.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Numerous digital tools to self-assess visual acuity have been introduced. The recent COVID-19 pandemic underlined the need for high-quality remote care. This review gives a current overview of digital tools for remotely assessing visual function and reports on their accuracy.

METHODS

We searched the databases of Embase and Pubmed, and systematically reviewed the literature, conforming to PRISMA guidelines. Two preliminary papers were added from medRxiv.org. The main outcome was the agreement of the digital tools with conventional clinical charts, as expressed by mean differences and 95% limits of agreement (95% LoA).

RESULTS

Seventeen publications included studies reported on 13 different digital tools. Most of the tools focus on distance visual acuity. The mean differences of the digital tools ranged from - 0.08 to 0.10 logMAR, when compared to traditional clinical assessments. The 95% LoA differed considerably between studies: from ± 0.08 logMAR to ± 0.47 logMAR, though the variability was less pronounced for higher visual acuities.

CONCLUSION

The low mean differences between digital visual acuity assessments and reference charts suggest clinical equivalence, though the wide 95% LoA identify a lower precision of digital self-assessments. This effect diminishes in individuals with better visual acuities, which is a common feature of visual acuity assessments. There is great potential for the digital tools to increase access to eye care and we expect the accuracy of the current tools to improve with every iteration in technology development.

摘要

引言

已经推出了许多用于自我评估视力的数字工具。最近的新冠疫情凸显了高质量远程护理的必要性。本综述对用于远程评估视觉功能的数字工具进行了当前概述,并报告了它们的准确性。

方法

我们检索了Embase和Pubmed数据库,并按照PRISMA指南系统地回顾了文献。从medRxiv.org补充了两篇初步论文。主要结果是数字工具与传统临床图表的一致性,以平均差异和95%一致性界限(95% LoA)表示。

结果

17篇出版物纳入了关于13种不同数字工具的研究报告。大多数工具侧重于远距离视力。与传统临床评估相比,数字工具的平均差异范围为-0.08至0.10 logMAR。各研究之间的95% LoA差异很大:从±0.08 logMAR到±0.47 logMAR,尽管对于较高视力,变异性不太明显。

结论

数字视力评估与参考图表之间较低的平均差异表明临床等效性,尽管较宽的95% LoA表明数字自我评估的精度较低。这种影响在视力较好的个体中会减弱,这是视力评估的一个共同特征。数字工具在增加眼科护理可及性方面有很大潜力,我们预计随着技术发展的每次迭代,当前工具的准确性都会提高。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ce2a/8589909/8d47dbc844f4/40123_2021_360_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验