A customised portable LogMAR chart with adjustable chart illumination for use as a mass screening device in the rural population

Journal of Postgraduate Medicine

Volumn 51, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 112-114

  Gouthaman, M ^a   Raman, R P ^a   Kadambi, A ^a   Padmajakumari, R ^a   Paul, P G ^a   Sharma, T ^a  

^a SANKARA NETHRALAYA   (India)

Author keywords

Customised logMAR chart; ETDRS chart; Vision screening device

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DEVICE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EARLY TREATMENT DIABETIC RETINOPATHY STUDY CHART; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; ILLUMINATION; LOGARITHMIC MINIMAL ANGLE RESOLUTION ACUITY CHART; MALE; MASS SCREENING; NORMAL HUMAN; RURAL POPULATION; SNELLEN TEST TYPE; VISION TEST; VISUAL ACUITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; HUMANS; INDIA; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RURAL HEALTH SERVICES; RURAL POPULATION; VISION SCREENING;

EID: 22144446699     PISSN: 00223859     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Mc Graw P, Winn B, Whitaker D. Reliability of the Snellen chart. BMJ 1995;310:1481-2.
2. Ferris FL 3rd, Kassoff A, Bresnick GH, Bailey I. New visual acuity charts for clinical research. Am J Ophthalmol 1982;94:91-6.
3. Bailey IL, Lovie JE. New design principles for visual acuity letter charts. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1976;53:740-5.
4. Gibson SA, Sanderson HF. Observer variation in ophthalmology. Br J Ophthalmol 1980;64:457-60.
5. Mbulaiteye SM, Reeves BC, Karabalinde A, Ruberantwari A, Mulwanyi F, Whitworth JA, et al. Evaluation of E-optotypes as a screening test and the prevalence and causes of visual loss in a rural population in SW Uganda. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 2002;9:251-62.
6. Bourne RR, Rosser DA, Sukudom P, Dineen B, Laidlaw DA, Johnson GJ. Evaluating a new logMAR chart designed to improve visual acuity assessment in population- based surveys. Eye 2003;17:754-8.
7. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measurement error. BMJ 1996;312:1654.
8. British Standards Institute. BS 4274:1968. Specification for test charts for determining distance visual acuity. London: British Standards Institute, 1968. Available from: http://avrc.city.ac.uk/o1handouts/BS4274:1968.
9. Sheedy JE. Standards for visual acuity measurement. In: Eye care technology forum proceedings. Bethesda, Maryland: National Institutes of Health, 1993.
10. Vanden Bosch ME, Wall M. Visual acuity scored by the letter-by- letter or probit methods has lower retest variability than the line assignment method. Eye 1997;11:411-7.
11. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307-10.
12. Yang YF, Cole MD. Visual acuity testing in schools: what needs to be done. BMJ 1996;313:1053.
13. Bailey IL, Bullimore MA, Raasch TW, Taylor HR. Clinical grading and the effect of scaling. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1991;32:422-32.
14. Wesemann W. Visual acuity measured via the Freiburg visual acuity test (FVT), Bailey Lovie chart and Landolt Ring chart. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 2002;219:660-7.
15. Recommended stardard procedures for the clinical measurement and specification of visual acuity. Report of working group 39. Committee on vision. Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences, National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. Adv Ophthalmol 1980;41:103-48.