• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of vision >Comparing performance on the MNREAD iPad application with the MNREAD acuity chart
【24h】

Comparing performance on the MNREAD iPad application with the MNREAD acuity chart

机译：将MNREAD iPad应用程序的性能与MNREAD视力表进行比较

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Our purpose was to compare reading performance measured with the MNREAD Acuity Chart and an iPad application (app) version of the same test for both normally sighted and low-vision participants. Our methods included 165 participants with normal vision and 43 participants with low vision tested on the standard printed MNREAD and on the iPad app version of the test. Maximum Reading Speed, Critical Print Size, Reading Acuity, and Reading Accessibility Index were compared using linear mixed-effects models to identify any potential differences in test performance between the printed chart and the iPad app. Our results showed the following: For normal vision, chart and iPad yield similar estimates of Critical Print Size and Reading Acuity. The iPad provides significantly slower estimates of Maximum Reading Speed than the chart, with a greater difference for faster readers. The difference was on average 3% at 100 words per minute (wpm), 6% at 150 wpm, 9% at 200 wpm, and 12% at 250 wpm. For low vision, Maximum Reading Speed, Reading Accessibility Index, and Critical Print Size are equivalent on the iPad and chart. Only the Reading Acuity is significantly smaller (I. E., better) when measured on the digital version of the test, but by only 0.03 logMAR (p = 0.013). Our conclusions were that, overall, MNREAD parameters measured with the printed chart and the iPad app are very similar. The difference found in Maximum Reading Speed for the normally sighted participants can be explained by differences in the method for timing the reading trials.
机译：我们的目的是比较正常视力和弱视参与者使用MNREAD视力表和同一测试的iPad应用程序（应用程序）版本测得的阅读效果。我们的方法包括165名正常视力的参与者和43位弱视的参与者在标准印刷MNREAD和iPad应用版本的测试中进行了测试。使用线性混合效应模型比较了最大阅读速度，临界打印尺寸，阅读敏锐度和阅读可及性指数，以识别印刷图表与iPad应用之间的任何潜在测试性能差异。我们的结果显示以下内容：对于正常视力，图表和iPad得出的“临界打印尺寸”和“阅读敏锐度”的估算值相似。 iPad提供的最大读取速度的估算值比图表低得多，对于更快的读者而言，差异更大。差异平均为每分钟100个字（wpm）3％，在150 wpm每分钟6％，在200 wpm每分钟9％和在250 wpm每分钟12％。对于低视力者，iPad和图表上的“最大阅读速度”，“阅读辅助索引”和“关键打印尺寸”是等效的。当在数字版本的测试中进行测量时，只有读数敏锐度显着较小（即更好），但仅为0.03 logMAR（p = 0.013）。我们的结论是，总体而言，用印刷图表和iPad应用程序测量的MNREAD参数非常相似。对于正常视力参与者，最大阅读速度中的差异可以通过阅读试验计时方法的差异来解释。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号