Comparison of Reading Test Parameters from the Print and Tablet Application Forms of the Minnesota Low Vision Reading Test.
Low vision rehabilitation
MNREAD
near vision examination
reading acuity
reading speed
Journal
Turkish journal of ophthalmology
ISSN: 2149-8709
Titre abrégé: Turk J Ophthalmol
Pays: Turkey
ID NLM: 101686048
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 06 2022
29 06 2022
Historique:
entrez:
30
6
2022
pubmed:
1
7
2022
medline:
2
7
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare reading parameters measured with the Turkish version of the Minnesota Low Vision Reading Test (MNREAD-TR) printed acuity chart and the tablet application version of the same test for both normally sighted and low-vision individuals. A total of 116 individuals (92 normally sighted and 24 low-vision) were included in the study. All participants were tested with both the print version of the MNREAD-TR chart (method 1) and the tablet application version (method 2). Reading acuity (RA), critical print size (CPS), maximum reading speed (MRS), and reading accessibility index (ACC) were compared statistically. No statistically significant difference was found in RA and CPS between the two methods for the normally sighted individuals (p=0.083 and p=0.075, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in RA and ACC between the two methods for the patients with low vision (p=0.159 and p=0.103, respectively). The mean MRS was 233.1±34.7 words per minute (wpm) with method 1 and 169.3±23.4 wpm with method 2 in the normally sighted group (p<0.001) and 93.2±50.2 wpm with method 1 and 68.2±34.7 wpm with method 2 in the low-vision group (p<0.001). In our study, it was found that the parameters RA and CPS in the normally sighted individuals and RA and ACC in the low vision individuals provided similar results in both forms of the MNREAD. The tablet application method can be preferred to eliminate evaluators' bias of scoring the printed chart. In addition, applications have other advantages such as being faster and more practical and providing automatic analysis of parameters, especially in low-vision rehabilitation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35770299
doi: 10.4274/tjo.galenos.2021.33581
pmc: PMC9249109
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
186-192Informations de copyright
©Copyright 2022 by Turkish Ophthalmological Association, Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology, published by Galenos Publishing House.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of Interest: No conflict of interest was declared by the authors.
Références
Optom Vis Sci. 2007 Sep;84(9):852-8
pubmed: 17873770
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2018 Jan;38(1):88-97
pubmed: 29265468
J Vis. 2018 Jan 1;18(1):8
pubmed: 29351351
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004 Sep;45(9):3349-54
pubmed: 15326160
Vision Res. 2013 Sep 20;90:43-51
pubmed: 23506967
Eye (Lond). 2001 Jun;15(Pt 3):430-5
pubmed: 11450769
PLoS One. 2019 Jun 7;14(6):e0216775
pubmed: 31173587
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2015 Sep;35(5):500-13
pubmed: 26303446
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2019 Jul;257(7):1499-1512
pubmed: 31111250
BMJ Open. 2013 Jun 20;3(6):
pubmed: 23794568
Ann Emerg Med. 2010 Jul;56(1):A21-2
pubmed: 20677379
PLoS One. 2016 Jul 14;11(7):e0159254
pubmed: 27414030
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2018 Oct 1;59(12):4798-4803
pubmed: 30347073
Vision Res. 2018 Dec;153:47-52
pubmed: 30292724
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012 Aug 13;53(9):5452-61
pubmed: 22661485
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011 May 18;52(6):3354-9
pubmed: 21282568
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011 Jun 01;52(6):3854-9
pubmed: 21421873
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009 Aug;50(8):3643-7
pubmed: 19339738
Eur J Ophthalmol. 2017 Nov 8;27(6):740-745
pubmed: 28430335
Can J Ophthalmol. 2006 Jun;41(3):289-312
pubmed: 16767184
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016 Apr;134(4):398-405
pubmed: 26868760
Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2021 Aug;28(4):293-300
pubmed: 33185485