Cybersecurity in Elections: Models of Interagency Collaboration

Staak, S. van der; Wolf, Peter J.

doi:10.31752/idea.2019.23

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Depending on local regulations and customs, a technician or a trained optician may perform the exam. Moreover, an authoritative consumer report revealed that prescriptions issued by eye care professionals can have wide variability [25]. Importantly, although our Web-based refraction test depends on the patient’s input, it has zero variability with respect to interpreting the patient’s responses, and it should provide high test-retest reproducibility.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of an Independent Web-Based Tool for Measuring Visual Acuity and Refractive Error (the Manifest versus Online Refractive Evaluation Trial): Prospective Open-Label Noninferiority Clinical Trial.

Wisse

Muijzer

Cassano³

et al. 2019

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundDigital tools provide a unique opportunity to increase access to eye care. We developed a Web-based test that measures visual acuity and both spherical and cylindrical refractive errors. This test is Conformité Européenne marked and available on the Easee website. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of this Web-based tool with traditional subjective manifest refraction in a prospective open-label noninferiority clinical trial.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of a Web-based refraction compared with a manifest refraction (golden standard).MethodsHealthy volunteers from 18 to 40 years of age, with a refraction error between –6 and +4 diopter (D), were eligible. Each participant performed the Web-based test, and the reference test was performed by an optometrist. An absolute difference in refractive error of <0.5 D was considered noninferior. Reliability was assessed by using an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Both uncorrected and corrected visual acuity were measured.ResultsA total of 200 eyes in 100 healthy volunteers were examined. The Web-based assessment of refractive error had excellent correlation with the reference test (ICC=0.92) and was considered noninferior to the reference test. Uncorrected visual acuity was similar with the Web-based test and the reference test (P=.21). Visual acuity was significantly improved using the prescription obtained by using the Web-based tool (P<.01). The Web-based test provided the best results in participants with mild myopia (ie, <3 D), with a mean difference of 0.02 (SD 0.49) D (P=.48) and yielding a corrected visual acuity of >1.0 in 90% (n=77) of participants.ConclusionsOur results indicate that Web-based eye testing is a valid and safe method for measuring visual acuity and refractive error in healthy eyes, particularly for mild myopia. This tool can be used for screening purposes, and it is an easily accessible alternative to the subjective manifest refraction test.Trial RegistrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT03313921; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03313921.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of an Independent Web-Based Tool for Measuring Visual Acuity and Refractive Error (the Manifest versus Online Refractive Evaluation Trial): Prospective Open-Label Noninferiority Clinical Trial.

Wisse

Muijzer

Cassano³

et al. 2019

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cyber threat actors could attempt to undermine citizens' opportunity to vote by tampering with election infrastructure [61]. This could be done, for instance, by disrupting electoral commissions via DDoS attacks or by compromising voting machines [62]. Such threats also imperil the secrecy of ballots.…”

Section: "Free and Fair" Electoral Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cyber risk to Australian democracy: cyber security from an election law perspective

Beirne¹

2022

Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper considers the effects of cyber operations on democratic processes from the normative framework of election law. The impacts of cyber operations on electoral transparency and participation, as well as on voters and the "free and fair" nature of elections are discussed, from an Australian perspective. This paper identifies that the just threat of cyber operations may have a distortionary impact on electoral processes and concludes by making recommendations for further research and consideration.

show abstract

Does Foreign Cyber Intervention in Electoral Processes Violate International Law?

Boulos

2021

Security in the Global Commons and Beyond

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cybersecurity in Elections: Models of Interagency Collaboration

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Validation of an Independent Web-Based Tool for Measuring Visual Acuity and Refractive Error (the Manifest versus Online Refractive Evaluation Trial): Prospective Open-Label Noninferiority Clinical Trial.

Validation of an Independent Web-Based Tool for Measuring Visual Acuity and Refractive Error (the Manifest versus Online Refractive Evaluation Trial): Prospective Open-Label Noninferiority Clinical Trial.

Cyber risk to Australian democracy: cyber security from an election law perspective

Does Foreign Cyber Intervention in Electoral Processes Violate International Law?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About