Mena-Guevara Kevin J, Piñero David P, de Fez Dolores
Group of Optics and Visual Perception, Department of Optics, Pharmacology and Anatomy, University of Alicante, San Vicente del Raspeig, 03690 Alicante, Spain.
Department of Pathology, University Miguel Hernández, Sant Joan d'Alacant, 03550 Alicante, Spain.
Vision (Basel). 2021 Nov 24;5(4):58. doi: 10.3390/vision5040058.
The current review aimed to collect and critically analyze the scientific peer-reviewed literature that is available about the use of digital applications for evaluation of visual parameters in electronic devices (tablets and smartphones), confirming if there are studies calibrating and validating each of these applications. Three bibliographic search engines (using the search equation described in the paper) and the Mendeley reference manager search engine were used to complete the analysis. Only articles written in English and that are evaluating the use of tests in healthy patients to measure or characterize any visual function aspects using tablets or smartphones were included. Articles using electronic visual tests to assess the results of surgical procedures or are conducted in pathological conditions were excluded. A total of 19 articles meeting these inclusion and exclusion criteria were finally analyzed. One critical point of all these studies is that there was no mention of the characterization (spatial and/or colorimetrical) of screens and the stimuli used in most of them. Only two studies described some level of calibration of the digital device before the beginning of the study. Most revised articles described non-controlled comparatives studies (73.7%), reporting some level of scientific evidence on the validation of tools, although more consistent studies are needed.
本综述旨在收集并批判性地分析有关使用数字应用程序评估电子设备(平板电脑和智能手机)视觉参数的科学同行评审文献,确认是否有研究对这些应用程序进行校准和验证。使用了三个文献搜索引擎(使用论文中描述的搜索公式)和Mendeley参考文献管理器搜索引擎来完成分析。仅纳入用英文撰写且评估在健康患者中使用测试通过平板电脑或智能手机测量或表征任何视觉功能方面的文章。排除使用电子视觉测试评估手术结果或在病理条件下进行的文章。最终共分析了19篇符合这些纳入和排除标准的文章。所有这些研究的一个关键点是,大多数研究都未提及屏幕的特性(空间和/或色度)以及所使用的刺激。只有两项研究描述了在研究开始前对数字设备进行了一定程度的校准。大多数修订文章描述的是非对照比较研究(73.7%),报告了关于工具验证的一定程度的科学证据,尽管需要更一致的研究。