These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: Validation of an iPad test of letter contrast sensitivity.
    Author: Kollbaum PS, Jansen ME, Kollbaum EJ, Bullimore MA.
    Journal: Optom Vis Sci; 2014 Mar; 91(3):291-6. PubMed ID: 24413274.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: An iPad-based letter contrast sensitivity test was developed (ridgevue.com) consisting of two letters on each page of an iBook. The contrast decreases from 80% (logCS = 0.1) to 0.5% (logCS = 2.3) by 0.1 log units per page. The test was compared to the Pelli-Robson Test and the Freiburg Acuity and Contrast Test. METHODS: Twenty normally sighted subjects and 20 low-vision subjects were tested monocularly at 1 m using each test wearing their habitual correction. After a 5-minute break, subjects were retested with each test in reverse order. Two different letter charts were used for both the Pelli-Robson and iPad tests, and the order of testing was varied systematically. For the Freiburg test, the target was a variable contrast Landolt C presented at eight possible orientations and used a 30-trial Best PEST procedure. Repeatability and agreement were assessed by determining the 95% limits of agreement (LoA) ± 1.96 SD of the differences between administrations or tests. RESULTS: All three tests showed good repeatability in terms of the 95% LoA: iPad = ± 0.19, Pelli-Robson = ± 0.19, and Freiburg = ± 0.15. The iPad test showed good agreement with the Freiburg test with similar mean (± SD) logCS (iPad = 1.98 ± 0.11, Freiburg = 1.96 ± 0.06) and with narrow 95% LoA (± 0.24), but the Pelli-Robson test gave significantly lower values (1.65 ± 0.04). Low-vision subjects had slightly poorer repeatability (iPad = ± 0.24, Pelli-Robson = ± 0.23, Freiburg = ± 0.21). Agreement between the iPad and Freiburg tests was good (iPad = 1.45 ± 0.40, Freiburg = 1.54 ± 0.37), but the Pelli-Robson test gave significantly lower values (1.30 ± 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: The iPad test showed similar repeatability and may be a rapid and convenient alternative to some existing measures. The Pelli-Robson test gave lower values than the other tests.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]