PURPOSE: To compare adult discrimination performance on nine pediatric visual acuity tests to determine the consistency of optotype design. METHODS: After their binocular acuity was measured with each test, eight adult observers (mean age, 27 years ± 6.3 SD; three emmetropes and five corrected myopes) were shown isolated single optotypes from the Allen figures, HOTV, Landolt C, Lea Numbers, Lea Symbols, Lighthouse, Patti Pics, Precision Vision numbers, and Tumbling E tests. A one-interval, two-alternative forced-choice protocol was used at a single distance, and each optotype was paired with all optotypes from the same chart. Confusion matrices were generated for each test and Luce's (1963) biased-choice model was fit to each matrix to derive measures of pairwise similarity between the optotypes. RESULTS: The acuities from the Allen figures (P < 0.001) and HOTV (P = 0.029) were the only ones to differ significantly from the reference Landolt C. The choice-model analyses of the confusion matrices revealed that the Allen figures, HOTV, Lighthouse, Patti Pics, and Precision Vision numbers tests all had significant differences in discriminability of optotypes within the test. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric acuity test optotypes are not all equally discriminable to adult observers with normal vision and no ocular disorders. The current data suggest that care must be taken when presenting limited numbers of optotypes, as is done with young patients.
PURPOSE: To compare adult discrimination performance on nine pediatric visual acuity tests to determine the consistency of optotype design. METHODS: After their binocular acuity was measured with each test, eight adult observers (mean age, 27 years ± 6.3 SD; three emmetropes and five corrected myopes) were shown isolated single optotypes from the Allen figures, HOTV, Landolt C, Lea Numbers, Lea Symbols, Lighthouse, Patti Pics, Precision Vision numbers, and Tumbling E tests. A one-interval, two-alternative forced-choice protocol was used at a single distance, and each optotype was paired with all optotypes from the same chart. Confusion matrices were generated for each test and Luce's (1963) biased-choice model was fit to each matrix to derive measures of pairwise similarity between the optotypes. RESULTS: The acuities from the Allen figures (P < 0.001) and HOTV (P = 0.029) were the only ones to differ significantly from the reference Landolt C. The choice-model analyses of the confusion matrices revealed that the Allen figures, HOTV, Lighthouse, Patti Pics, and Precision Vision numbers tests all had significant differences in discriminability of optotypes within the test. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric acuity test optotypes are not all equally discriminable to adult observers with normal vision and no ocular disorders. The current data suggest that care must be taken when presenting limited numbers of optotypes, as is done with young patients.
Authors: Velma Dobson; Candice E Clifford-Donaldson; Joseph M Miller; Katherine A Garvey; Erin M Harvey Journal: J AAPOS Date: 2009-04-05 Impact factor: 1.220
Authors: O Engin; D D G Despriet; H M van der Meulen-Schot; A Romers; X Slot; M Tjon Fo Sang; M Fronius; H Kelderman; H J Simonsz Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2014-09-17 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Nicola S Anstice; Robert J Jacobs; Samantha K Simkin; Melissa Thomson; Benjamin Thompson; Andrew V Collins Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-02-02 Impact factor: 3.240