The Experts below are selected from a list of 306 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Tomomi Nishida - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Comparison of LogMAR Eye Charts with angular vision for visually impaired: the Berkeley rudimentary vision test vs LogMAR One target Landolt ring Eye Chart
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2013Co-Authors: Marie Miwa, Masaki Iwanami, Nobuhisa Mizuki, Tomomi NishidaAbstract:Background It is not common to quantify visual acuity worse than 2.0 logarithm of the minimal angle resolution (logMAR) (commensurate with decimal visual acuity 0.01) at ophthalmology clinics. Recently, the Berkeley rudimentary vision test (BRVT) was developed as a simple measurement tool of logMAR with angular vision for quantifying poor levels of visual acuity. We compared the difference between BRVT and conventional Landolt ring logMAR Chart with angular vision measured by the logMAR one target Landolt ring Eye Chart (LogMAR LEC). Methods We reviewed 110 patients with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in the better Eye from light perception (LP) to 0.8 logMAR measured by LogMAR LEC. The reproducibility of the log MAR LEC and BRVT was evaluated on 39 Eyes from 20 patients, and 33 Eyes from 20 patients respectively. The comparison of logMAR between BRVT and logMAR LEC was evaluated by surveying 61 Eyes from 70 patients. In addition, regardless of their BCVA, the Eyes from patients with worse than 2.0 logMAR by LogMAR LEC were re-evaluated by BRVT. Results The logMAR of patients examined by BRVT or logMAR LEC did not show any significant difference between the first and second examinations, and there was a strong correlation between the examinations in both Eye Charts. The BRVT significantly produced better logMAR compared with logMAR LEC, and the strong correlation was shown between both Eye Charts. Although 35 Eyes from 28 patients among 110 patients could not be quantified by logMAR LEC, 18 Eyes of 35 Eyes could be quantified logMAR by BRVT. Conclusions The BRVT and logMAR LEC are reliable visual acuity measurement tools. Moreover, the BRVT is potentially effective in quantifying visual acuity of the more severe visually impaired patients.
-
comparison of logmar Eye Charts with angular vision for visually impaired the berkeley rudimentary vision test vs logmar one target landolt ring Eye Chart
Graefes Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2013Co-Authors: Marie Miwa, Masaki Iwanami, Nobuhisa Mizuki, Tomomi NishidaAbstract:Background It is not common to quantify visual acuity worse than 2.0 logarithm of the minimal angle resolution (logMAR) (commensurate with decimal visual acuity 0.01) at ophthalmology clinics. Recently, the Berkeley rudimentary vision test (BRVT) was developed as a simple measurement tool of logMAR with angular vision for quantifying poor levels of visual acuity. We compared the difference between BRVT and conventional Landolt ring logMAR Chart with angular vision measured by the logMAR one target Landolt ring Eye Chart (LogMAR LEC).
Marie Miwa - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Comparison of LogMAR Eye Charts with angular vision for visually impaired: the Berkeley rudimentary vision test vs LogMAR One target Landolt ring Eye Chart
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2013Co-Authors: Marie Miwa, Masaki Iwanami, Nobuhisa Mizuki, Tomomi NishidaAbstract:Background It is not common to quantify visual acuity worse than 2.0 logarithm of the minimal angle resolution (logMAR) (commensurate with decimal visual acuity 0.01) at ophthalmology clinics. Recently, the Berkeley rudimentary vision test (BRVT) was developed as a simple measurement tool of logMAR with angular vision for quantifying poor levels of visual acuity. We compared the difference between BRVT and conventional Landolt ring logMAR Chart with angular vision measured by the logMAR one target Landolt ring Eye Chart (LogMAR LEC). Methods We reviewed 110 patients with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in the better Eye from light perception (LP) to 0.8 logMAR measured by LogMAR LEC. The reproducibility of the log MAR LEC and BRVT was evaluated on 39 Eyes from 20 patients, and 33 Eyes from 20 patients respectively. The comparison of logMAR between BRVT and logMAR LEC was evaluated by surveying 61 Eyes from 70 patients. In addition, regardless of their BCVA, the Eyes from patients with worse than 2.0 logMAR by LogMAR LEC were re-evaluated by BRVT. Results The logMAR of patients examined by BRVT or logMAR LEC did not show any significant difference between the first and second examinations, and there was a strong correlation between the examinations in both Eye Charts. The BRVT significantly produced better logMAR compared with logMAR LEC, and the strong correlation was shown between both Eye Charts. Although 35 Eyes from 28 patients among 110 patients could not be quantified by logMAR LEC, 18 Eyes of 35 Eyes could be quantified logMAR by BRVT. Conclusions The BRVT and logMAR LEC are reliable visual acuity measurement tools. Moreover, the BRVT is potentially effective in quantifying visual acuity of the more severe visually impaired patients.
-
comparison of logmar Eye Charts with angular vision for visually impaired the berkeley rudimentary vision test vs logmar one target landolt ring Eye Chart
Graefes Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2013Co-Authors: Marie Miwa, Masaki Iwanami, Nobuhisa Mizuki, Tomomi NishidaAbstract:Background It is not common to quantify visual acuity worse than 2.0 logarithm of the minimal angle resolution (logMAR) (commensurate with decimal visual acuity 0.01) at ophthalmology clinics. Recently, the Berkeley rudimentary vision test (BRVT) was developed as a simple measurement tool of logMAR with angular vision for quantifying poor levels of visual acuity. We compared the difference between BRVT and conventional Landolt ring logMAR Chart with angular vision measured by the logMAR one target Landolt ring Eye Chart (LogMAR LEC).
Nobuhisa Mizuki - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Comparison of LogMAR Eye Charts with angular vision for visually impaired: the Berkeley rudimentary vision test vs LogMAR One target Landolt ring Eye Chart
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2013Co-Authors: Marie Miwa, Masaki Iwanami, Nobuhisa Mizuki, Tomomi NishidaAbstract:Background It is not common to quantify visual acuity worse than 2.0 logarithm of the minimal angle resolution (logMAR) (commensurate with decimal visual acuity 0.01) at ophthalmology clinics. Recently, the Berkeley rudimentary vision test (BRVT) was developed as a simple measurement tool of logMAR with angular vision for quantifying poor levels of visual acuity. We compared the difference between BRVT and conventional Landolt ring logMAR Chart with angular vision measured by the logMAR one target Landolt ring Eye Chart (LogMAR LEC). Methods We reviewed 110 patients with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in the better Eye from light perception (LP) to 0.8 logMAR measured by LogMAR LEC. The reproducibility of the log MAR LEC and BRVT was evaluated on 39 Eyes from 20 patients, and 33 Eyes from 20 patients respectively. The comparison of logMAR between BRVT and logMAR LEC was evaluated by surveying 61 Eyes from 70 patients. In addition, regardless of their BCVA, the Eyes from patients with worse than 2.0 logMAR by LogMAR LEC were re-evaluated by BRVT. Results The logMAR of patients examined by BRVT or logMAR LEC did not show any significant difference between the first and second examinations, and there was a strong correlation between the examinations in both Eye Charts. The BRVT significantly produced better logMAR compared with logMAR LEC, and the strong correlation was shown between both Eye Charts. Although 35 Eyes from 28 patients among 110 patients could not be quantified by logMAR LEC, 18 Eyes of 35 Eyes could be quantified logMAR by BRVT. Conclusions The BRVT and logMAR LEC are reliable visual acuity measurement tools. Moreover, the BRVT is potentially effective in quantifying visual acuity of the more severe visually impaired patients.
-
comparison of logmar Eye Charts with angular vision for visually impaired the berkeley rudimentary vision test vs logmar one target landolt ring Eye Chart
Graefes Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2013Co-Authors: Marie Miwa, Masaki Iwanami, Nobuhisa Mizuki, Tomomi NishidaAbstract:Background It is not common to quantify visual acuity worse than 2.0 logarithm of the minimal angle resolution (logMAR) (commensurate with decimal visual acuity 0.01) at ophthalmology clinics. Recently, the Berkeley rudimentary vision test (BRVT) was developed as a simple measurement tool of logMAR with angular vision for quantifying poor levels of visual acuity. We compared the difference between BRVT and conventional Landolt ring logMAR Chart with angular vision measured by the logMAR one target Landolt ring Eye Chart (LogMAR LEC).
Masaki Iwanami - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Comparison of LogMAR Eye Charts with angular vision for visually impaired: the Berkeley rudimentary vision test vs LogMAR One target Landolt ring Eye Chart
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2013Co-Authors: Marie Miwa, Masaki Iwanami, Nobuhisa Mizuki, Tomomi NishidaAbstract:Background It is not common to quantify visual acuity worse than 2.0 logarithm of the minimal angle resolution (logMAR) (commensurate with decimal visual acuity 0.01) at ophthalmology clinics. Recently, the Berkeley rudimentary vision test (BRVT) was developed as a simple measurement tool of logMAR with angular vision for quantifying poor levels of visual acuity. We compared the difference between BRVT and conventional Landolt ring logMAR Chart with angular vision measured by the logMAR one target Landolt ring Eye Chart (LogMAR LEC). Methods We reviewed 110 patients with best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in the better Eye from light perception (LP) to 0.8 logMAR measured by LogMAR LEC. The reproducibility of the log MAR LEC and BRVT was evaluated on 39 Eyes from 20 patients, and 33 Eyes from 20 patients respectively. The comparison of logMAR between BRVT and logMAR LEC was evaluated by surveying 61 Eyes from 70 patients. In addition, regardless of their BCVA, the Eyes from patients with worse than 2.0 logMAR by LogMAR LEC were re-evaluated by BRVT. Results The logMAR of patients examined by BRVT or logMAR LEC did not show any significant difference between the first and second examinations, and there was a strong correlation between the examinations in both Eye Charts. The BRVT significantly produced better logMAR compared with logMAR LEC, and the strong correlation was shown between both Eye Charts. Although 35 Eyes from 28 patients among 110 patients could not be quantified by logMAR LEC, 18 Eyes of 35 Eyes could be quantified logMAR by BRVT. Conclusions The BRVT and logMAR LEC are reliable visual acuity measurement tools. Moreover, the BRVT is potentially effective in quantifying visual acuity of the more severe visually impaired patients.
-
comparison of logmar Eye Charts with angular vision for visually impaired the berkeley rudimentary vision test vs logmar one target landolt ring Eye Chart
Graefes Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, 2013Co-Authors: Marie Miwa, Masaki Iwanami, Nobuhisa Mizuki, Tomomi NishidaAbstract:Background It is not common to quantify visual acuity worse than 2.0 logarithm of the minimal angle resolution (logMAR) (commensurate with decimal visual acuity 0.01) at ophthalmology clinics. Recently, the Berkeley rudimentary vision test (BRVT) was developed as a simple measurement tool of logMAR with angular vision for quantifying poor levels of visual acuity. We compared the difference between BRVT and conventional Landolt ring logMAR Chart with angular vision measured by the logMAR one target Landolt ring Eye Chart (LogMAR LEC).
Amy K Hutchinson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
comparing distance visual acuity measurement with a novel Eye Chart and the landolt c Chart in a population of children aged 6 18 years
International Ophthalmology, 2017Co-Authors: John P Gorham, Beau B Bruce, Amy K HutchinsonAbstract:Purpose The Handy Eye Chart™ is designed to assist in evaluating the visual acuity of patients with non-standard communication styles. The Handy Eye Chart™ has been previously validated against the early treatment diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) Chart. The aim of this research is to compare visual acuity outcomes with The Handy Eye Chart™ against the international gold standard, the Landolt C Chart, in a population of children.
-
comparison of the handy Eye Chart and the lea symbols Chart in a population of deaf children aged 7 18 years
Journal of Aapos, 2016Co-Authors: John P Gorham, Beau B Bruce, Amy K HutchinsonAbstract:Purpose To compare the results of visual acuity testing in a population of deaf children using the Handy Eye Chart versus the Lea Symbols Chart and to compare testability and preference between Charts. Methods A total of 24 participants were recruited at the Atlanta Area School for the Deaf. Visual Acuity was evaluated using the Handy Eye Chart and the Lea Symbols Chart. Patient preference and duration of testing were measured. Results The mean difference between the visual acuity as measured by each Chart was –0.02 logMAR (95% CI, −0.06 to 0.03). Testing with the Handy Eye Chart was an average of 13.79 seconds faster than testing with the Lea Symbols Chart (95% CI, 1.1-26.47; P = 0.03). Of the 24 participants, 17 (71%) preferred the Handy Eye Chart (95% CI: 49%-87%; P = 0.07). Conclusions The Handy Eye Chart is a fast, valid, and useful tool for measuring visual acuity in deaf children age 7-18 years. Additional research is needed to evaluate the utility of the Handy Eye Chart in younger children and deaf adults.
-
The Handy Eye Check: a mobile medical application to test visual acuity in children
Journal of Aapos, 2014Co-Authors: Keri N. Toner, Michael J Lynn, T. Rowan Candy, Amy K HutchinsonAbstract:Purpose To compare visual acuity results obtained with the Handy Eye Chart to results obtained using the Handy Eye Check, a mobile medical application that electronically presents isolated Handy Eye Chart optotypes according the Amblyopia Treatment Study (ATS) protocol. Methods Consecutive patients 6-18 years of age presenting for Eye examinations between May 30, 2012, and June 26, 2012, were invited to participate. Monocular visual acuity testing was performed on the subject's poorer-seeing Eye using both the Handy Eye Check and the Handy Eye Chart under the same conditions. Visual acuity was first tested using the mobile application, then using the Chart, followed by repeated application testing. Patients were excluded if they were unable to undergo the required visual acuity testing or if visual acuity in the worse-seeing Eye was less than 20/200 (for validity testing, but not reliability testing). Results There was a strong linear correlation ( r = 0.92) and a mean difference in acuity of −0.005 logMAR, or less than one letter (95% CI, −0.03 to 0.02), between the two tests. The 95% limits of agreement were ± 2 lines. Test–retest reliability was high, with 81% of retest scores within 0.1 logMAR (5 letters) and 100% within 0.2 logMAR (10 letters), an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.93, and a standard error of measurement of 0.08. Conclusions The Handy Eye Check mobile application compares similarly to the Handy Eye Chart as a valid and reliable test of visual acuity in children age 6-18 years.
-
the handy Eye Chart a new visual acuity test for use in children
Ophthalmology, 2012Co-Authors: Caroline H Cromelin, Rowan T Candy, Michael J Lynn, Cindy Lou Harrington, Amy K HutchinsonAbstract:Objective To design a simple matching acuity test based on hand gestures that is minimally dependent on familiarity with symbols and letters. The visual acuity results obtained from children using the Handy Eye Chart were compared with results obtained with the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) Chart. Design Evaluation of diagnostic test or technology. Participants Sixty children aged 6 to 16 years were recruited consecutively from the Pediatric Ophthalmology section of the Emory Eye Center. Methods Monocular visual acuity was tested using both the new Eye Chart and the ETDRS Chart, alternating the order of administration between subjects. Testing was performed on the subject's Eye with the poorest acuity. Main Outcome Measures Outcome measures were monocular logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) visual acuity scores for each Chart. Results The acuities were shown to have a strong linear correlation ( r = 0.95) and a mean difference in acuity of −0.03 (95% confidence interval, −0.05 to −0.01) logMAR, equivalent to approximately 1.5 letters, with the new Eye Chart underestimating the vision as determined by the ETDRS Chart. The 95% limits of agreement were ±1.6 lines. Conclusions This study supports the validity of the new Eye Chart as a measure of visual acuity in pediatric patients aged 6 to 18 years with vision ranging from 20/16 to 20/200. Financial Disclosure(s) Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.
