The combined influence of knowledge, training and experience when grading contact lens complications

Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 79-85

  Efron, Nathan ^a   Morgan, Philip B ^a   Jagpal, Ritu ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Accuracy; Contact lens complications; Experience; Grading scales; Knowledge; Reliability; Training

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPETENCE; CONTACT LENS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EXPERIENCE; EYE DISEASE; HUMAN; OPTOMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRAINING; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; EDUCATION;

CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CONTACT LENSES; DIAGNOSTIC ERRORS; EYE DISEASES; HUMANS; OPTOMETRY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0037268744     PISSN: 02755408     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1475-1313.2003.00091.x     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Bailey, I. L., Bullimore, M. A., Raash, T. W. and Taylor, H. R. (1991) Clinical grading and the effects of scaling. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 32, 422-432.
2. Bland, J. M. and Altman, D. G. (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 8476, 307-310.
3. Buchner, A., Faul, F. and Erdfelder, E. (1997) G·Power: A Priori, Post-Hoc and Compromise Power Analyses for the Macintosh Version 2.1.2 (Computer Program). University of Trier, Trier, Germany.
4. Bullimore, M. A. and Bailey, I. L. (1993) Considerations in the subjective assessment of cataract. Optom. Vis. Sci. 70, 880-885.
5. Chong, T., Simpson, T. and Fonn, D. (2000) The repeatability of discrete and continuous anterior segment grading scales. Optom. Vis. Sci. 77, 244-251.
6. Cornea and Contact Lens Research Unit (1997) CCLRU grading scales (Appendix D). In: Contact Lenses (eds A. J. Phillips and L. Speedwell) Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK, pp. 863-867.
7. Davies, M. (1978) Safety evaluation of new soft lens materials. In: Soft Contact Lenses. Clinical and Applied Technology (ed. M. Ruben) Bailliere Tindall, London, UK, pp. 378-379.
8. Efron, N. (1999) Grading scales and morphs. In: Contact Lens Complications. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK, pp. 161-167.
9. Efron, N. (2002) Efron grading scales for contact lens complications (Appendix K). In: Contact Lens Practice. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK, pp. 487-489.
10. Efron, N. and Morgan, P. B. (2001a) Efron Grading Morphs. In: Contact Lens Complications CD - An Interactive Multimedia Tool (eds N. Efron and P. B. Morgan). Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK.
11. Efron, N. and Morgan, P. B. (2001b) The Efron Grading Tutor. In: Contact Lens Complications CD - An Interactive Multimedia Tool (eds N. Efron and P. B. Morgan) Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK.
12. Efron, N., Morgan, P. B. and Jagpal, R. (2002) Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 22, 341-349.
13. Efron, N., Morgan, P. B. and Katsara, S. S. (2001) Validation of grading scales for contact lens complications. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 21, 17-29.
14. Fieguth, P. and Simpson, T. (2002) Automated measurement of bulbar redness. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 43, 340-347.
15. ISO, 5725-1 (1994) Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of Measurement Methods and Results - Part 1: General Principles and Definitions. International Organisation for Standardisation, Switzerland.
16. Quigley, H. A., Reacher, M., Katz, J., Strahlman, E., Gilbert, D. and Scott, R. (1993) Quantitative grading of nerve fiber layer photographs. Ophthalmology 100, 1800-1807.
17. Wallace, D. E., McGreal, G. T., O'Toole, G., Holloway, P., Wallace, M., McDermott, E. W. and Blake, J. (2000) The influence of experience and specialisation on the reliability of a common clinical sign. Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl. 82, 336-338.