Literature DB >> 7660598

Psychophysics of reading--XIII. Predictors of magnifier-aided reading speed in low vision.

S J Ahn1, G E Legge.   

Abstract

A key clinical problem in low-vision assessment is finding simple measures that are predictive of real-world performance. Our purpose was to determine whether a set of clinical variables could predict how well low-vision subjects read with their magnifiers. The variables were Snellen acuity, presence/absence of central scotomas, clear/cloudy ocular media, age, magnifier type, and score on a standardized test of reading speed (Minnesota Low-vision Reading Test). Forty low-vision subjects identified the magnifier they most "preferred" to use, based on the frequency and length of time used, ease of use, or any other factor considered important by each subject. All subjects were highly experienced with their magnifier (3 months to 21 yr of use). We classified the magnifiers into five categories: (1) standard correction only; (2) hand-held magnifier; (3) spectacle-mounted magnifier; (4) closed-circuit TV; and (5) stand magnifier. Subjects used their preferred magnifiers to read aloud printed paragraphs of about 150 words from which their reading speeds were calculated. By far the best predictor of the magnifier-aided reading speed was the score on the standardized reading test which accounted for 79.7% of the variance. 43.7% of the variance was accounted for by age, and 42.3% by magnifier type. Snellen acuity, central visual field status, and ocular media status were not significantly correlated with magnifier-aided reading speed. We conclude that a standardized clinical reading test can give a valid prediction of the reading speed a low-vision patient is likely to achieve with a magnifier.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7660598     DOI: 10.1016/0042-6989(94)00293-u

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  13 in total

1.  Reliability of a standardized reading chart system: variance component analysis, test-retest and inter-chart reliability.

Authors:  Eva Stifter; Franz König; Thomas Lang; Peter Bauer; Sibylla Richter-Müksch; Michaela Velikay-Parel; Wolfgang Radner
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-12-10       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 2.  [Ophthalmologic reading charts : Part 2: Current logarithmically scaled reading charts].

Authors:  W Radner
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.059

3.  New standardised texts for assessing reading performance in four European languages.

Authors:  G A Hahn; D Penka; C Gehrlich; A Messias; M Weismann; L Hyvärinen; M Leinonen; M Feely; G Rubin; C Dauxerre; F Vital-Durand; S Featherston; K Dietz; S Trauzettel-Klosinski
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.638

Review 4.  Reading aids for adults with low vision.

Authors:  Gianni Virgili; Ruthy Acosta; Lori L Grover; Sharon A Bentley; Giovanni Giacomelli
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-10-23

Review 5.  Optical reading aids for children and young people with low vision.

Authors:  Lucy Barker; Rachel Thomas; Gary Rubin; Annegret Dahlmann-Noor
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-03-04

6.  A new principle for the standardization of long paragraphs for reading speed analysis.

Authors:  Wolfgang Radner; Stephan Radner; Gabriela Diendorfer
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-11-05       Impact factor: 3.117

Review 7.  Reading aids for adults with low vision.

Authors:  Gianni Virgili; Ruthy Acosta; Sharon A Bentley; Giovanni Giacomelli; Claire Allcock; Jennifer R Evans
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-04-17

Review 8.  Reading charts in ophthalmology.

Authors:  W Radner
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-04-14       Impact factor: 3.117

9.  Toward developing a standardized Arabic continuous text reading chart.

Authors:  Balsam Alabdulkader; Susan Jennifer Leat
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2016-05-06

10.  Enhanced text spacing improves reading performance in individuals with macular disease.

Authors:  Sally Blackmore-Wright; Mark A Georgeson; Stephen J Anderson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-11       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.