Validation of a computerised logMAR visual acuity measurement system (COMPlog): Comparison with ETDRS and the electronic ETDRS testing algorithm in adults and amblyopic children

British Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 92, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 241-244

  Laidlaw, D A H ^a,b   Tailor, V ^b   Shah, N ^a   Atamian, S ^a   Harcourt, C ^b  

^a ST THOMAS HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b MAIDSTONE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHM; AMBLYOPIA; ARTICLE; CHILD; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EYE DISEASE; GOLD STANDARD; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEASUREMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; VALIDATION STUDY; VISUAL ACUITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; AMBLYOPIA; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; VISION TESTS; VISUAL ACUITY;

EID: 38949212214     PISSN: 00071161     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2007.121715     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bailey IL, Lovie JE. New design principles for visual acuity letter charts. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1976;53:740-5.
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. Laidlaw DA, Abbott A, Rosser DA. Development of a clinically feasible logMAR alternative to the Snellen chart: performance of the "compact reduced logMAR" visual acuity chart in amblyopic children. Br J Ophthalmol 2003;87:1232-4.
4. Beck RW, Moke PS, Turpin AH, et al. A computerized method of visual acuity testing: adaptation of the early treatment of diabetic retinopathy study testing protocol. Am J Ophthalmol 2003;135:194- 205.
5. Cotter SA, Chu RH, Chandler DL, et al. Reliability of the electronic early treatment diabetic retinopathy study testing protocol in children 7 to <13 years old. Am J Ophthalmol 2003;136:655-61.
6. Moke PS, Turpin AH, Beck RW, et al. Computerized method of visual acuity testing: adaptation of the amblyopia treatment study visual acuity testing protocol. Am J Ophthalmol 2001;132:903-9.
7. Rosser DA, Laidlaw DA, Murdoch IE. The development of a "reduced logMAR" visual acuity chart for use in routine clinical practice. Br J Ophthalmol 2001;85:432-6.
8. 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.
9. Bailey IL, Bullimore MA, Raasch TW, et al. Clinical grading and the effects of scaling. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1991;32:422-32.
10. Ardhi A, Cagenello R. On the statistical reliability of letter-chart visual acuity measurements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1993;34:120-9.
11. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986:307-10.
12. Rosser DA, Murdoch IE, Fitzke FW, et al. Improving on ETDRS acuities: design and results for a computerised thresholding device. Eye 2003;17:701-6.
13. Siderov J, Tiu AL. Variability of measurements of visual acuity in a large eye clinic. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1999;77:673-6.
14. Lovie-Kitchin JE. Validity and reliability of visual acuity measurements. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1988;8:363-70.
15. Reeves BC, Wood JM, Hill AR. Vistech VCTS 6500 charts - within- and between-session reliability. Optom Vis Sci 1991;68:728-37.
16. Elliott DB, Sheridan M. The use of accurate visual acuity measurements in clinical anti-cataract formulation trials. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1988;8:397-401.
17. Arditi A, Cagenello R. On the statistical reliability of letter-chart visual acuity measurements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1993;34:120-9.
18. Reeves BC, Wood JM, Hill AR. Reliability of high- and low-contrast letter charts. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1993;13:17-26.