The response of the accommodation system to digital and print images

Minette Devenier, R. Hansraj, T. Rasengane
{"title":"The response of the accommodation system to digital and print images","authors":"Minette Devenier, R. Hansraj, T. Rasengane","doi":"10.4102/aveh.v80i1.662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The transition from traditional print medium to a digital medium may affect the accommodative response (AR) because of the differences in the characteristics of the targets viewed.Aim: This study investigated how the accommodation system responded to targets displayed on a tablet computer compared to that on paper.Setting: The study was conducted amongst students at a university in South Africa.Methods: Using a quantitative, cross-sectional study the AR, amplitude of accommodation (AA), and accommodative facility (AF) were assessed with a target on an iPad and a paper-based one on a non-probability sample of 30 university students. Data was analysed using descriptive statistics and Bland Altman plots.Results: The median AR with a tablet was +0.25 dioptre (D) compared to +0.21 D with the paper-based target. This difference was neither statistically nor clinically significant. The median AA with a tablet computer target was 10.59 D and 9.85 D with a paper-based target. While this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.002), Bland Altman analysis revealed comparable measurements with both types of targets. Both Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test (p = 0.462) and Bland Altman analysis found comparable medians for AF obtained with a target on paper (7.67 cycles per minute [cpm]) and a target on the tablet computer (7.17 cpm) to be comparable.Conclusion: The accuracy, strength and flexibility of accommodation were comparable for tablet computer and paper-based targets.","PeriodicalId":7694,"journal":{"name":"African Vision and Eye Health","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Vision and Eye Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/aveh.v80i1.662","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The transition from traditional print medium to a digital medium may affect the accommodative response (AR) because of the differences in the characteristics of the targets viewed.Aim: This study investigated how the accommodation system responded to targets displayed on a tablet computer compared to that on paper.Setting: The study was conducted amongst students at a university in South Africa.Methods: Using a quantitative, cross-sectional study the AR, amplitude of accommodation (AA), and accommodative facility (AF) were assessed with a target on an iPad and a paper-based one on a non-probability sample of 30 university students. Data was analysed using descriptive statistics and Bland Altman plots.Results: The median AR with a tablet was +0.25 dioptre (D) compared to +0.21 D with the paper-based target. This difference was neither statistically nor clinically significant. The median AA with a tablet computer target was 10.59 D and 9.85 D with a paper-based target. While this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.002), Bland Altman analysis revealed comparable measurements with both types of targets. Both Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test (p = 0.462) and Bland Altman analysis found comparable medians for AF obtained with a target on paper (7.67 cycles per minute [cpm]) and a target on the tablet computer (7.17 cpm) to be comparable.Conclusion: The accuracy, strength and flexibility of accommodation were comparable for tablet computer and paper-based targets.
调节系统对数字和印刷图像的响应
背景:从传统印刷媒体到数字媒体的过渡可能会影响适应性响应(AR),因为所观察的目标的特征不同。目的:本研究考察了调节系统对显示在平板电脑上的目标的反应与在纸上显示的目标的反应。环境:这项研究是在南非一所大学的学生中进行的。方法:采用定量的横断面研究方法,对30名大学生的AR、调节幅度(AA)和调节设施(AF)进行了定量评估,采用iPad上的目标和纸上的目标。数据分析采用描述性统计和Bland Altman图。结果:片剂的中位AR为+0.25屈光度(D),而纸质靶的中位AR为+0.21 D。这一差异无统计学意义,也无临床意义。平板电脑靶的AA中值为10.59 D,纸质靶的AA中值为9.85 D。虽然这一差异具有统计学意义(p = 0.002),但Bland Altman分析显示,两种类型的目标的测量结果具有可比性。Wilcoxon Signed rank检验(p = 0.462)和Bland Altman分析均发现,纸上靶(7.67 cycles / min [cpm])和平板电脑靶(7.17 cpm)获得的AF中位数具有可比性。结论:平板靶和纸质靶的调节精度、调节强度和调节灵活性相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
African Vision and Eye Health
African Vision and Eye Health Health Professions-Optometry
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
46
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信