A new computer-based pediatric vision-screening test

Yamada, Tomohiko; Hatt, Sarah R.; Moke, Pamela S.; Parrucci, Nick L.; Reese, John J.; Ruben, James B.; Holmes, Jonathan M.

doi:10.1016/j.jaapos.2015.01.011

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(26 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In children aged 5–6 years there was an enhanced advantage of TAO (AUC TAOregular = 0.97, AUC TAOvanishing = 0.98) over Parr (AUC Parr = 0.75). TAO results for sensitivity (TAO regular = 91%, TAO vanishing = 91%) and specificity (TAO regular = 85%, TAO vanishing = 82%) are in line with the electronic Jaeb Visual Acuity Screener, reporting optimal sensitivity and specificity of 90% and 83%, respectively . As with LoA, trials used within the QUEST protocol can be vastly truncated if screening is the goal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Recognition acuity in children measured using The Auckland Optotypes

Hamm

Anstice

Black

et al. 2018

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Sloan letters displayed by the Electronic Visual Acuity (EVA) system are the gold standard for recognition acuity measurement in research settings. However, letters are not always appropriate for children. The Auckland Optotypes (TAO) are a new, open-access set of 10 pictograms available in regular and vanishing formats. We sought to assess feasibility of using both formats of TAO for measuring visual acuity (VA) in children using a Bayesian adaptive staircase, in a community setting. Methods: We tested 121 children (5-12 years old) with both formats of TAO, a handheld flipchart vision screener (Parr vision test), as well as the gold standard EVA. We measured feasibility of the three comparison tests in three ways. First, using limits of agreement (LoA) with EVA, second, calculating area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and finally, investigating trial-bytrial responses. Results: Agreement between tests was within test-retest reliability of EVA measures (LoA TAOregular = AE0.14, LoA TAOvanishing = AE0.15, LoA Parr = AE0.16 logMAR). TAO tests were highly effective at identifying children with vision impairment (AUC TAOregular = 0.96, AUC TAOvanishing = 0.95), whereas Parr was less effective (AUC Parr = 0.82). In 5-6 year old children there was an enhanced advantage of TAO (AUC TAOregular = 0.97, AUC TAOvanishing = 0.98) over Parr (AUC Parr = 0.75). Although each child completed 16 trials, approximately 10 trials were sufficient to achieve excellent LoA, and six trials sufficient for accurate screening. Conclusion: Threshold VA assessment and vision screening are feasible using both vanishing and regular formats of TAO.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Recognition acuity in children measured using The Auckland Optotypes

Hamm

Anstice

Black

et al. 2018

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If the testing device could be integrated with the health‐care system, automation could also help with referral and follow‐up. Given their advantages, electronic acuity tests are being used more in community settings, and are increasingly recommended for a variety of applications including visual acuity measurements and screening . Disadvantages of such devices include the need for electricity and for specific testing environments to appropriately position the tablet, and reduce glare on the screen.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Newer technologies offer several advantages over traditional methods. First, many electronic tests can be run on the user's own equipment (for example the Jaeb Visual Acuity Screener can be run on any Microsoft Windows device), and can present targets (‘optotypes’) which are open‐access (freely available, for example the standard Sloan letters or The Auckland Optotypes [TAO]). Second, automation of the testing procedure can reduce scoring and recording errors, streamline data storage, promote referral and facilitate follow‐up.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of vision screening of 5–15‐year‐old children in three Tongan schools: comparison of The Auckland Optotypes and Lea symbols

Hamm

Langridge

Black

et al. 2020

Clinical and Experimental Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Comprehensive vision screening programmes for children are an important part of public health strategy, but do not exist in many countries, including Tonga. This project set out to assess: (1) the functional vision of children attending primary schools in Tonga and (2) how a new recognition acuity test (The Auckland Optotypes displayed on a tablet computer) compares to use of a standardised eye chart in this setting. Methods Children from three Tongan primary schools were invited to participate. Acuity testing was conducted using a standardised recognition acuity chart (Lea symbols) and the tablet test displaying two formats of The Auckland Optotypes. Measures of ocular alignment, stereo acuity and non‐cycloplegic photorefraction were also taken. Results Parents of 249 children consented to participate. One child was untestable. Only 2.8 per cent of testable children achieved visual acuity worse than 0.3 logMAR in the weaker eye. Results from the Spot Photoscreener suggested that no children had myopia or hyperopia, but that some children had astigmatism. The tablet test was practical in a community setting, and showed ±0.2 logMAR limits of agreement with the Lea symbols chart. Conclusion The sample of children in Tongan primary schools had good functional vision. A modified version of the tablet acuity test is a promising option for vision screening in this context.

show abstract

“…Some of these applications have been investigated through peer-reviewed publications. 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 The GoCheck Kids application is used for vision screening through photo-screening and checking visual acuity. This application has been studied for photoscreening and detecting amblyopia risk factors, but not for checking visual acuity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teleophthalmology: Evaluation of Phone-based Visual Acuity in a Pediatric Population

Silverstein

Williams

Brown

et al. 2021

American Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

: Purpose With the recent rise of teleophthalmology due to coronavirus disease, we are in need of accurate and reliable methods of checking visual acuity remotely. We compare the visual acuity as measured by the GoCheck Kids application, HOTV with the amblyopia treatment study (ATS), and our clinic protocol. Design This is a prospective, comparison of visual acuity assessment methods. Methods Established patients (aged 3-18) in the practice of a single pediatric ophthalmologist were eligible. Visual acuity was measured by: 1) GoCheck Kids mobile application (by patient’s family member), 2) HOTV-ATS (by study personnel), and 3) regular clinic protocol (by ophthalmic technician). To assess agreement between measures of acuity, intraclass correlations with 95% confidence intervals were computed. Results Fifty-three children participated. The mean difference between GoCheck Kids and HOTV-ATS acuities (0.094) was significantly different (p<0.001); the intraclass correlation (ICC) was 0.55 (95% CI: 0.40, 0.68). The mean difference between GoCheck Kids and chart acuities (0.010) was not significantly different (p=0.319); ICC: 0.59 (95% CI: 0.45, 0.71). The mean difference between HOTV-ATS and chart acuities (0.084) was significantly different (p<0.001); ICC: 0.66 (95% CI: 0.53, 0.76). The percent of eyes with visual acuity as measured by GoCheck Kids that was within 1 line of the HOTV-ATS and chart acuity was 65.3% and 86.7%, respectively. Conclusions GoCheck Kids as checked by a family member provides a modest correlation of visual acuity compared to the chart screen and a fair correlation of visual acuity compared to HOTV-Amblyopia Treatment Study protocol, though a vast majority are within 1 line.

show abstract

A new computer-based pediatric vision-screening test

Cited by 13 publications

References 18 publications

Recognition acuity in children measured using The Auckland Optotypes

Recognition acuity in children measured using The Auckland Optotypes

Evaluation of vision screening of 5–15‐year‐old children in three Tongan schools: comparison of The Auckland Optotypes and Lea symbols

Teleophthalmology: Evaluation of Phone-based Visual Acuity in a Pediatric Population

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About