The Experts below are selected from a list of 279 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).
Jin Hak Lee - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A novel color Vision Test for detection of diabetic macular edema.
Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2014Co-Authors: Young Joo Shin, Kyu Hyung Park, Jeong-min Hwang, Won Ryang Wee, Jin Hak Lee, In Bum Lee, Joon Young HyonAbstract:PURPOSE To determine the sensitivity of the Seoul National University (SNU) computerized color Vision Test for detecting diabetic macular edema. METHODS From May to September 2003, a total of 73 eyes of 73 patients with diabetes mellitus were examined using the SNU computerized color Vision Test and optical coherence tomography (OCT). Color deficiency was quantified as the total error score on the SNU Test and as error scores for each of four color quadrants corresponding to yellows (Q1), greens (Q2), blues (Q3), and reds (Q4). SNU error scores were assessed as a function of OCT foveal thickness and total macular volume (TMV). RESULTS The error scores in Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 measured by the SNU color Vision Test increased with foveal thickness (P < 0.05), whereas they were not correlated with TMV. Total error scores, the summation of Q1 and Q3, the summation of Q2 and Q4, and blue-yellow (B-Y) error scores were significantly correlated with foveal thickness (P < 0.05), but not with TMV. CONCLUSIONS The observed correlation between SNU color Test error scores and foveal thickness indicates that the SNU Test may be useful for detection and monitoring of diabetic macular edema.
-
a new color Vision Test to differentiate congenital and acquired color Vision defects
Ophthalmology, 2007Co-Authors: Young Joo Shin, Kyu Hyung Park, Jeong-min Hwang, Won Ryang Wee, Jin Hak LeeAbstract:Purpose To investigate the efficacy of a novel computer-controlled color Test for the differentiation of congenital and acquired color Vision deficiency. Design Observational cross-sectional study. Participants Thirty-one patients with congenital color Vision deficiency and 134 patients with acquired color Vision deficiency with a Snellen visual acuity better than 20/30 underwent an ophthalmologic examination including the Ishihara color Test, Hardy-Rand-Rittler Test, Nagel anomaloscopy, and the Seohan computerized hue Test between June, 2003, and January, 2004. Methods To investigate the type of color Vision defect, a graph of the Seohan computerized hue Test was divided into 4 quadrants and error scores in each quadrant were summated. The ratio between the sums of error scores of quadrants I and III (Q1+Q3) and those of quadrants II and IV (Q2+Q4) was calculated. Main Outcome Measures Error scores and ratio in quadrant analysis of the Seohan computerized hue Test. Results The Seohan computerized hue Test showed that the sum of Q2+Q4 was significantly higher than the sum of Q1+Q3 in congenital color Vision deficiency ( P t Test) and that the sum of Q2+Q4 was significantly lower than the sum of Q1+Q3 in acquired color Vision deficiency ( P t Test). In terms of discriminating congenital and acquired color Vision deficiency, the ratio in quadrant analysis had 93.3% sensitivity and 98.5% specificity with a reference value of 1.5 by the Seohan computerized hue Test (95% confidence interval). Conclusions The quadrant analysis and ratio of (Q2+Q4)/(Q1+Q3) using the Seohan computerized hue Test effectively differentiated congenital and acquired color Vision deficiency.
-
the discriminatiuon between congenital and acquired color Vision defects by computerized color Vision Test
Journal of The Korean Ophthalmological Society, 2005Co-Authors: Young Joo Shin, Won Ryang Wee, Jin Hak Lee, In Bum Lee, Sang Yul Choi, Kyu Hyoung Park, Min Seoup Kim, Jeoung Min Hwang, Jae Hee ChoiAbstract:Purpose: To investigate the characteristics of congenital and acquired color Vision defects with Seohan computerized hue Test and SNU (Seoul National University) computerized color Test and to help to discriminate between congenital and acquired color Vision defect Methods: from June 2003 to January 2004, patient with congenital and acquired color Vision defect and visual acuities more than 20/30 underwent Seohan computerized hue and SNU computerized color Tests. Their results were compared with each other. Quadrant analysis and RQ calculation were done. Results: On Seohan computerized hue and SNU computerized color Tests, congenital color Vision defects showed mainly red-green color Vision defects (p
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).
