PURPOSE: To use a psychophysical scaling method to estimate the perceived redness of reference images of the McMonnies and Chapman-Davies (six reference levels), Institute for Eye Research (four), Efron (five), and Validated Bulbar Redness (five) bulbar redness grading scales. METHODS: Regions of interest were cropped out of the grading scale reference images; three separate image sets (color, grayscale, and binarized) were created for each scale, combining to a total of 20 images per image set. Ten naïve observers were asked to arrange printed copies of the 20 images per image set across a distance of 1.5 m on a flat surface, so that separation reflected their perception of bulbar redness; only start and end point of this range were indicated. The position of each image was averaged across observers to represent the perceived redness for this image, within the 0 to 100 range. Subjective data were compared with physical attributes (chromaticity and spatial metrics) of redness. RESULTS: For each image set, perceived redness of the reference images within each scale was ordered as expected, but not all consecutive within-scale levels were rated as having different redness. Perceived redness of the reference images varied between scales, with different ranges of severity being covered by the images. Perception of redness severity depended on the image set (repeated-measures analysis of variance; all p < or = 0.0002). The perceived redness was strongly associated with the physical attributes of the reference images. CONCLUSIONS: Subjective estimates of redness are based on a combination of chromaticity and vessel-based components. Psychophysical scaling of perceived redness lends itself to being used to cross-calibrate these four clinical scales.
PURPOSE: To use a psychophysical scaling method to estimate the perceived redness of reference images of the McMonnies and Chapman-Davies (six reference levels), Institute for Eye Research (four), Efron (five), and Validated Bulbar Redness (five) bulbar redness grading scales. METHODS: Regions of interest were cropped out of the grading scale reference images; three separate image sets (color, grayscale, and binarized) were created for each scale, combining to a total of 20 images per image set. Ten naïve observers were asked to arrange printed copies of the 20 images per image set across a distance of 1.5 m on a flat surface, so that separation reflected their perception of bulbar redness; only start and end point of this range were indicated. The position of each image was averaged across observers to represent the perceived redness for this image, within the 0 to 100 range. Subjective data were compared with physical attributes (chromaticity and spatial metrics) of redness. RESULTS: For each image set, perceived redness of the reference images within each scale was ordered as expected, but not all consecutive within-scale levels were rated as having different redness. Perceived redness of the reference images varied between scales, with different ranges of severity being covered by the images. Perception of redness severity depended on the image set (repeated-measures analysis of variance; all p < or = 0.0002). The perceived redness was strongly associated with the physical attributes of the reference images. CONCLUSIONS: Subjective estimates of redness are based on a combination of chromaticity and vessel-based components. Psychophysical scaling of perceived redness lends itself to being used to cross-calibrate these four clinical scales.
Authors: Ilaria Macchi; Vatinee Y Bunya; Mina Massaro-Giordano; Richard A Stone; Maureen G Maguire; Yuanjie Zheng; Min Chen; James Gee; Eli Smith; Ebenezer Daniel Journal: Ocul Surf Date: 2018-06-06 Impact factor: 5.033