Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/107489
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorSchool of Optometry-
dc.contributorResearch Centre for SHARP Vision-
dc.creatorWu, Y-
dc.creatorKeel, S-
dc.creatorCarneiro, VLA-
dc.creatorZhang, S-
dc.creatorWang, W-
dc.creatorLiu, C-
dc.creatorTang, X-
dc.creatorHan, X-
dc.creatorHe, M-
dc.date.accessioned2024-06-27T01:33:48Z-
dc.date.available2024-06-27T01:33:48Z-
dc.identifier.issn0007-1161-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/107489-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherBMJ Groupen_US
dc.subjectLow vision aiden_US
dc.subjectPublic healthen_US
dc.subjectSurveys and Questionnairesen_US
dc.subjectVisionen_US
dc.titleReal-world application of a smartphone-based visual acuity test (WHOeyes) with automatic distance calibrationen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1136/bjo-2023-324913-
dcterms.abstractBackground: To develop and assess the usability of a smartphone-based visual acuity (VA) test with an automatic distance calibration (ADC) function, the iOS version of WHOeyes.-
dcterms.abstractMethods: The WHOeyes was an upgraded version with a distinct feature of ADC of an existing validated VA testing app called V@home. Three groups of Chinese participants with different ages (≤20, 20–40, >40 years) were recruited for distance and near VA testing using both an Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart and the WHOeyes. The ADC function would determine the testing distance. Infrared rangefinder was used to determine the testing distance for the ETDRS, and actual testing distance for the WHOeyes. A questionnaire-based interview was administered to assess the satisfaction.-
dcterms.abstractResults: The actual testing distance determined by the WHOeyes ADC showed an overall good agreement with the desired testing distance in all three age groups (p>0.50). Regarding the distance and near VA testing, the accuracy of WHOeyes was equivalent to ETDRS. The mean difference between the WHOeyes and ETDRS ranged from −0.084 to 0.012 logMAR, and the quadratic weighted kappa (QWK) values were >0.75 across all groups. The test–retest reliability of WHOeyes was high for both near and distance VA, with a mean difference ranging from −0.040 to 0.004 logMAR and QWK all >0.85. The questionnaire revealed an excellent user experience and acceptance of WHOeyes.-
dcterms.abstractConclusions: WHOeyes could provide accurate measurement of the testing distance as well as the distance and near VA when compared to the gold standard ETDRS chart.-
dcterms.accessRightsembargoed accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationBritish journal of ophthalmology, Published Online First: 21 March 2024, https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjo-2023-324913-
dcterms.isPartOfBritish journal of ophthalmology-
dcterms.issued2024-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85189891371-
dc.identifier.eissn1468-2079-
dc.description.validate202406 bcch-
dc.identifier.FolderNumbera2894en_US
dc.identifier.SubFormID48665en_US
dc.description.fundingSourceOthersen_US
dc.description.fundingTextGlobal STEM Professorship Scheme; National Natural Science Foundation of Chinaen_US
dc.description.pubStatusEarly releaseen_US
dc.date.embargo0000-00-00 (to be updated)en_US
dc.description.oaCategoryGreen (AAM)en_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Open Access Information
Status embargoed access
Embargo End Date 0000-00-00 (to be updated)
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

1
Citations as of Jun 30, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.