Literature DB >> 11503943

Modeling logMAR visual acuity scores: effects of termination rules and alternative forced-choice options.

A Carkeet1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) charts come in a variety of alternative forced-choice (AFC) formats and can be used with a variety of different rules to determine when to stop a subject reading down a chart (termination rules).
METHODS: Exact calculation and Monte Carlo simulation techniques were used to compare logMAR scores for different termination rules and for infinite-, 26-, 10-, 8-, 4-, and 2-AFC logMAR chart formats. Slope-corrected standard deviation, an index of variability of the underlying ideal threshold, was used as a common metric for the different test conditions.
RESULTS: The mean and standard deviation of logMAR scores can be significantly affected by termination rules and AFC format. For different AFC formats, different termination criteria were found to give optimal slope-corrected standard deviations.
CONCLUSION: A number of clinically suitable termination rules are proposed for different AFC format logMAR charts. For letter-by-letter scoring of Bailey-Lovie and EDTRS charts, it is recommended that researchers and practitioners use a termination rule of stopping after four or more mistakes on a line.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11503943     DOI: 10.1097/00006324-200107000-00017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  21 in total

1.  Predictions of postoperative visual outcome in subjects with cataract: a preoperative and postoperative study.

Authors:  William A Douthwaite; Marta Vianya-Estopà; David B Elliott
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-11-23       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  Repeatability of visual function measures in age-related macular degeneration.

Authors:  Tariq Aslam; Sajjad Mahmood; Konstantinos Balaskas; Niall Patton; Rajeev G Tanawade; Shi Zhuan Tan; Stephen A Roberts; Jeremy Parkes; Paul N Bishop
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-07-25       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  Change in visual acuity is well correlated with change in image-quality metrics for both normal and keratoconic wavefront errors.

Authors:  Ayeswarya Ravikumar; Jason D Marsack; Harold E Bedell; Yue Shi; Raymond A Applegate
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-11-26       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  The pattern of learned visual improvements in adult amblyopia.

Authors:  Andrew T Astle; Ben S Webb; Paul V McGraw
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2011-09-14       Impact factor: 4.799

5.  Performance of a computerised visual acuity measurement device in subjects with age-related macular degeneration: comparison with gold standard ETDRS chart measurements.

Authors:  Y Bokinni; N Shah; O Maguire; D A H Laidlaw
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2015-06-05       Impact factor: 3.775

6.  Grating acuity and contrast tests for clinical trials of severe vision loss.

Authors:  Ava K Bittner; Pamela Jeter; Gislin Dagnelie
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.973

7.  Validation of printed and computerised crowded Kay picture logMAR tests against gold standard ETDRS acuity test chart measurements in adult and amblyopic paediatric subjects.

Authors:  N Shah; D A H Laidlaw; S Rashid; P Hysi
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2011-12-23       Impact factor: 3.775

8.  Can human amblyopia be treated in adulthood?

Authors:  Andrew T Astle; Paul V McGraw; Ben S Webb
Journal:  Strabismus       Date:  2011-09

9.  Is an objective refraction optimised using the visual Strehl ratio better than a subjective refraction?

Authors:  Gareth D Hastings; Jason D Marsack; Lan Chi Nguyen; Han Cheng; Raymond A Applegate
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 10.  The Assessment of Visual Function and Functional Vision.

Authors:  Christopher R Bennett; Peter J Bex; Corinna M Bauer; Lotfi B Merabet
Journal:  Semin Pediatr Neurol       Date:  2019-05-11       Impact factor: 1.636

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.