Literature DB >> 30208426

Bayesian adaptive assessment of the reading function for vision: The qReading method.

Fang Hou1, Yukai Zhao2, Luis Andres Lesmes3, Peter Bex4, Deyue Yu5, Zhong-Lin Lu2.   

Abstract

Reading is a fundamental skill that can be significantly affected by visual disabilities. Reading performance, which typically is measured as reading speed with a reading chart, is a key endpoint for quantifying normal or abnormal vision. Despite its importance for clinical vision, existing reading tests for vision are time consuming and difficult to administer. Here, we propose a Bayesian adaptive method, the qReading method, for automated assessment of the reading speed versus print size function. We implemented the qReading method with a word/nonword lexical decision task and validated the method with computer simulations and a psychophysical experiment. Computer simulations showed that both the interrun standard deviation and intrarun half width of the 68.2% credible interval of the estimated reading speeds from the qReading method were less than 0.1 log10 units after 150 trials, with a bias of 0.05 log10 units. In the psychophysical experiment, reading functions measured by the qReading and Psi methods (Kontsevich & Tyler, 1999) in a word/nonword lexical decision task were compared. The estimated reading functions obtained with the qReading and Psi methods were highly correlated (r = 0.966 ± 0.004, p < 0.01). The precision of the qReading method with 225 trials was comparable to that of the Psi method with 450 trials. We conclude that the qReading method can precisely and accurately assess the reading function in much reduced time, with great promise in both basic research and clinical applications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30208426      PMCID: PMC6133446          DOI: 10.1167/18.9.6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  51 in total

1.  A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility.

Authors:  L I Lin
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Comparison of a trifocal intraocular lens with a +3.0 D bifocal IOL: results of a prospective randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Soraya M R Jonker; Noël J C Bauer; Natalia Y Makhotkina; Tos T J M Berendschot; Frank J H M van den Biggelaar; Rudy M M A Nuijts
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 3.351

3.  Routine versus As-Needed Bevacizumab with 12-Weekly Assessment Intervals for Neovascular Age-Related Macular Degeneration: 92-Week Results of the GMAN Trial.

Authors:  Sajjad Mahmood; Stephen A Roberts; Tariq M Aslam; Jeremy Parkes; Kate Barugh; Paul N Bishop
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2015-04-17       Impact factor: 12.079

4.  The design and use of a new near-vision chart.

Authors:  I L Bailey; J E Lovie
Journal:  Am J Optom Physiol Opt       Date:  1980-06

5.  Visual function and subjective quality of life compared in subjects with acquired macular disease.

Authors:  C A Hazel; K L Petre; R A Armstrong; M T Benson; N A Frost
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  What lexical decision and naming tell us about reading.

Authors:  Leonard Katz; Larry Brancazio; Julia Irwin; Stephen Katz; James Magnuson; D H Whalen
Journal:  Read Writ       Date:  2011-05-29

7.  Low vision reading with sequential word presentation.

Authors:  G S Rubin; K Turano
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  The MacDQoL individualized measure of the impact of macular degeneration on quality of life: reliability and responsiveness.

Authors:  Jan Mitchell; James Wolffsohn; Alison Woodcock; Stephen J Anderson; Timothy Ffytche; Martin Rubinstein; Winfried Amoaku; Clare Bradley
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-06-11       Impact factor: 5.258

9.  The development of an automated sentence generator for the assessment of reading speed.

Authors:  Michael D Crossland; Gordon E Legge; Steven C Dakin
Journal:  Behav Brain Funct       Date:  2008-03-28       Impact factor: 3.759

10.  Noise provides new insights on contrast sensitivity function.

Authors:  Ge Chen; Fang Hou; Fang-Fang Yan; Pan Zhang; Jie Xi; Yifeng Zhou; Zhong-Lin Lu; Chang-Bing Huang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  5 in total

1.  Assessing reading performance in the periphery with a Bayesian adaptive approach: The qReading method.

Authors:  Timothy G Shepard; Fang Hou; Peter J Bex; Luis A Lesmes; Zhong-Lin Lu; Deyue Yu
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2019-05-01       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  A novel Bayesian adaptive method for mapping the visual field.

Authors:  Pengjing Xu; Luis Andres Lesmes; Deyue Yu; Zhong-Lin Lu
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2019-12-02       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Psychophysical Validation of a Novel Active Learning Approach for Measuring the Visual Acuity Behavioral Function.

Authors:  Yukai Zhao; Luis Andres Lesmes; Michael Dorr; Peter J Bex; Zhong-Lin Lu
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 3.283

4.  Effects of Task on Reading Performance Estimates.

Authors:  Tiffany Arango; Deyue Yu; Zhong-Lin Lu; Peter J Bex
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-08-07

5.  Mapping the Contrast Sensitivity of the Visual Field With Bayesian Adaptive qVFM.

Authors:  Pengjing Xu; Luis A Lesmes; Deyue Yu; Zhong-Lin Lu
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 4.677

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.