不同手持式视力表对近视力评估的比较验证研究

IF 3.2 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
David Ziyou Chen MBBS, FRCOphth , Yih-Chung Tham PhD , Liang Shen PhD , Soon-Phaik Chee MMed (Ophth), FRCOphth
{"title":"不同手持式视力表对近视力评估的比较验证研究","authors":"David Ziyou Chen MBBS, FRCOphth ,&nbsp;Yih-Chung Tham PhD ,&nbsp;Liang Shen PhD ,&nbsp;Soon-Phaik Chee MMed (Ophth), FRCOphth","doi":"10.1016/j.xops.2025.100790","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To develop a conversion table and compare the cross-validity of 3 types of widely utilized near vision charts: the ETDRS near chart, the N-notation chart, and the Rosenbaum chart.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>A prospective, cross-sectional, comparative validation study.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>Aged ≥40 years.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A conversion table for the 3 types of near charts was created using objective character sizing based on vertical height captured using a surgical microscope with a 10× magnification. Eligible presbyopic patients had their near vision tested sequentially with 3 near charts in a randomized order.</div></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><div>Pearson correlation coefficient (<em>r</em>) for the relationship among the near visual acuity charts. The consistency between the different charts was evaluated by Bland−Altman diagrams.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 204 participants (129 women, 63.2%) were recruited for the study (mean age, 58.9 ± 7.1 years). For correlation, <em>r</em> ranged from 0.596 to 0.836 (all <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). The Rosenbaum chart had the smallest range of difference against the ETDRS chart (standard deviation [SD] = 0.12), followed by the N-notation chart (SD = 0.15). Most of the converted logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) values from the N-notation and Rosenbaum charts were between 0.0 and 0.1 higher than the ETDRS logMAR equivalent (range: 0.07–0.11), with a tendency for both the N-notation and Rosenbaum charts to overestimate logMAR at more positive values.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We have developed a conversion table for 3 types of commonly used near vision charts. When compared with the ETDRS near chart, the Rosenbaum chart had a smaller range of difference than the N-notation chart. Both the Rosenbaum and N-notation charts tended to underestimate near vision at worse vision.</div></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><div>The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74363,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology science","volume":"5 5","pages":"Article 100790"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Validation Study of Near Visual Acuity Assessment Using Different Handheld Acuity Charts\",\"authors\":\"David Ziyou Chen MBBS, FRCOphth ,&nbsp;Yih-Chung Tham PhD ,&nbsp;Liang Shen PhD ,&nbsp;Soon-Phaik Chee MMed (Ophth), FRCOphth\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.xops.2025.100790\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To develop a conversion table and compare the cross-validity of 3 types of widely utilized near vision charts: the ETDRS near chart, the N-notation chart, and the Rosenbaum chart.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>A prospective, cross-sectional, comparative validation study.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>Aged ≥40 years.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A conversion table for the 3 types of near charts was created using objective character sizing based on vertical height captured using a surgical microscope with a 10× magnification. Eligible presbyopic patients had their near vision tested sequentially with 3 near charts in a randomized order.</div></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><div>Pearson correlation coefficient (<em>r</em>) for the relationship among the near visual acuity charts. The consistency between the different charts was evaluated by Bland−Altman diagrams.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 204 participants (129 women, 63.2%) were recruited for the study (mean age, 58.9 ± 7.1 years). For correlation, <em>r</em> ranged from 0.596 to 0.836 (all <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). The Rosenbaum chart had the smallest range of difference against the ETDRS chart (standard deviation [SD] = 0.12), followed by the N-notation chart (SD = 0.15). Most of the converted logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) values from the N-notation and Rosenbaum charts were between 0.0 and 0.1 higher than the ETDRS logMAR equivalent (range: 0.07–0.11), with a tendency for both the N-notation and Rosenbaum charts to overestimate logMAR at more positive values.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We have developed a conversion table for 3 types of commonly used near vision charts. When compared with the ETDRS near chart, the Rosenbaum chart had a smaller range of difference than the N-notation chart. Both the Rosenbaum and N-notation charts tended to underestimate near vision at worse vision.</div></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><div>The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74363,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ophthalmology science\",\"volume\":\"5 5\",\"pages\":\"Article 100790\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ophthalmology science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666914525000880\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666914525000880","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的编制ETDRS近视图、n -记数图和Rosenbaum近视图3种常用的近视图转换表,并对其交叉效度进行比较。设计一项前瞻性、横断面、比较验证的研究。参与者年龄≥40岁。方法利用10倍放大率的外科显微镜拍摄的垂直高度,以客观特征大小为基础,制作3种近图的转换表。符合条件的老花眼患者按随机顺序用3张近视图进行视力测试。主要观察指标近视力表间关系的相关系数(r)。采用Bland - Altman图评价不同图表之间的一致性。结果共纳入204例受试者(女性129例,占63.2%),平均年龄58.9±7.1岁。相关性r为0.596 ~ 0.836(均P <;0.001)。Rosenbaum图与ETDRS图的差异最小(标准差[SD] = 0.12),其次是n符号图(SD = 0.15)。n -表示法和Rosenbaum图的最小分辨角(logMAR)值的转换对数大多比ETDRS的logMAR值高0.0 ~ 0.1(范围0.07 ~ 0.11),且n -表示法和Rosenbaum图都有高估logMAR值的趋势。结论建立了3种常用近视图的换算表。与ETDRS近图相比,Rosenbaum图的差异范围小于n符号图。罗森鲍姆图和n符号图都倾向于低估视力较差的近视力。财务披露作者在本文中讨论的任何材料中没有专有或商业利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparative Validation Study of Near Visual Acuity Assessment Using Different Handheld Acuity Charts

Objective

To develop a conversion table and compare the cross-validity of 3 types of widely utilized near vision charts: the ETDRS near chart, the N-notation chart, and the Rosenbaum chart.

Design

A prospective, cross-sectional, comparative validation study.

Participants

Aged ≥40 years.

Methods

A conversion table for the 3 types of near charts was created using objective character sizing based on vertical height captured using a surgical microscope with a 10× magnification. Eligible presbyopic patients had their near vision tested sequentially with 3 near charts in a randomized order.

Main Outcome Measures

Pearson correlation coefficient (r) for the relationship among the near visual acuity charts. The consistency between the different charts was evaluated by Bland−Altman diagrams.

Results

A total of 204 participants (129 women, 63.2%) were recruited for the study (mean age, 58.9 ± 7.1 years). For correlation, r ranged from 0.596 to 0.836 (all P < 0.001). The Rosenbaum chart had the smallest range of difference against the ETDRS chart (standard deviation [SD] = 0.12), followed by the N-notation chart (SD = 0.15). Most of the converted logarithm of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) values from the N-notation and Rosenbaum charts were between 0.0 and 0.1 higher than the ETDRS logMAR equivalent (range: 0.07–0.11), with a tendency for both the N-notation and Rosenbaum charts to overestimate logMAR at more positive values.

Conclusions

We have developed a conversion table for 3 types of commonly used near vision charts. When compared with the ETDRS near chart, the Rosenbaum chart had a smaller range of difference than the N-notation chart. Both the Rosenbaum and N-notation charts tended to underestimate near vision at worse vision.

Financial Disclosure(s)

The author(s) have no proprietary or commercial interest in any materials discussed in this article.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ophthalmology science
Ophthalmology science Ophthalmology
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
89 days
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信