0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Change of Visual Acuity Recording Methods in Clinical Studies across the Years

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose: To report any differences in the visual acuity (VA) recording method used in peer-reviewed ophthalmology clinical studies over the past decade. Methods: We reviewed the method of assessing and reporting VA in 160 clinical studies from 2 UK and 2 US peer-reviewed journals, published in 1994 and 2004. Results: The method used to assess VA was specified in 62.5% of UK-published and 60% of US-published papers. In the results sections of the UK publications the VA measurements presented were Snellen acuity (n = 58), logMAR acuity (n = 20) and symbol acuity (n = 1). Similarly in the US publications the VA was recorded in the results section using Snellen acuity (n = 60) and logMAR acuity (n = 14). Overall 10% of the authors appeared to convert Snellen acuity measurements to logMAR format. Five studies (3%) chose to express Snellen-type acuities in decimal form, a method which can easily lead to confusion given the increased use of logMAR scoring systems. Conclusion: The authors recommend that to ensure comparable visual results between studies and different study populations it would be useful if clinical scientists worked to standardized VA testing protocols and reported results in a manner consistent with the way in which they are measured.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 2

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Use of Best and Final Visual Acuity Outcomes in Ophthalmological Research

          To evaluate how often visual acuity outcomes are reported in the ophthalmological literature as best or final outcomes, despite potential bias with this type of analysis, as compared with interval outcomes, when a specific condition may continue to cause gain or loss of visual acuity beyond the time that the best or final outcome is determined.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Die Darstellung der Sehschärfe in ophthalmologischen Publikationen

             R Becker,  M. Graf (2004)
              Bookmark

              Author and article information

              Journal
              OPH
              Ophthalmologica
              10.1159/issn.0030-3755
              Ophthalmologica
              S. Karger AG
              0030-3755
              1423-0267
              2008
              May 2008
              22 May 2008
              : 222
              : 3
              : 173-177
              Affiliations
              aRoyal Victoria Hospital and bQueen’s University of Belfast, Belfast, UK
              Article
              126080 Ophthalmologica 2008;222:173–177
              10.1159/000126080
              18497526
              © 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel

              Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

              Page count
              Tables: 3, References: 11, Pages: 5
              Categories
              Original Paper

              Comments

              Comment on this article