Baseline MNREAD Measures for Normally Sighted Subjects From Childhood to Old Age

Calabrèse, Aurélie; Cheong, Allen M. Y.; Cheung, SH; He, Ya‐Ling; Kwon, MiYoung; Js, Mansfield; Subramanian, Ahalya; Yu, Dihua; Legge, Gordon E.

doi:10.1167/iovs.16-19580

Cited by 78 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore the typical ACC for normally-sighted young adults is 1.0 (Calabrèse, Cheong, et al, 2016;Calabrèse, Owsley, et al, 2016). ACC decreases in adults aged over 40 at a rate of 0.003 units per year, reaching a suggested value of 0.88 by the age of 81 years (Calabrèse, Cheong, et al, 2016). Average ACC values of 0.76 have been noted in a group of observers aged 55-85 years, and of 0.77 for bilateral pseudophakes (Calabrèse, Owsley, et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…ACC represents the reading speed of an observer over a range of relevant print sizes based on a normalised reading speed of 200wpm. Therefore the typical ACC for normally-sighted young adults is 1.0 (Calabrèse, Cheong, et al, 2016;Calabrèse, Owsley, et al, 2016). ACC decreases in adults aged over 40 at a rate of 0.003 units per year, reaching a suggested value of 0.88 by the age of 81 years (Calabrèse, Cheong, et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Benefits of low vision aids to reading accessibility

Latham

2018

Vision Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Reading Accessibility Index (ACC) has been proposed as a single-value reading parameter that can capture information on both reading speed and print sizes that can be read. It is defined as the average reading speed across a relevant range of print sizes (1.3-0.4logMAR), normalised by typical young-adult reading speed of 200wpm, and with values typically in the range of 0-1. This study determines the impact of low vision aids (LVAs) on reading by evaluating ACC values for visually impaired observers reading both without and with an optical LVA. A secondary analysis of previously published data obtained from 100 visually impaired observers attending low vision assessments was undertaken. Observers had mixed causes of visual impairment but predominantly macular degeneration (n=55). All used an LVA for reading, with 88% using it 'often' or 'very often'. MNREAD reading parameters, including ACC, were determined both for reading without an LVA (clinical function) and with the LVA habitually used for reading (aided function). There was a significant (p<.001) improvement in ACC from clinical (0.31 (95% CI 0.25, 0.36)) to aided conditions (0.47 (0.41, 0.52)). Average improvement in ACC with an LVA was 0.16 (0.13, 0.18), but the benefits of LVAs in terms of improvement in ACC could not be predicted from clinical visual function. Even with an LVA reading accessibility is, on average, markedly reduced from normal levels. The ACC is a potentially valuable outcome measure for reading rehabilitation interventions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Benefits of low vision aids to reading accessibility

Latham

2018

Vision Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reportedly, a smaller CPS value means better reading performance, and it indicates that the patient requires a lower level of magnification to read comfortably [25]. It has been reported that MRS is specific to each individual, usually in accordance with their age [13,26,27], and that RA has a weaker effect on daily life because RA is the smallest font size that the patient is able to read. In the present study, although the MRS increased significantly at 12 months post-surgery, its median value changed by approximately 4% from 343 characters per minute (CPM) to 357 CPM, which is considered to be of poor clinical significance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of pre- and post-surgery reading ability in patients with epiretinal membrane: a prospective observational study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This study aimed to investigate the pre-and post-surgery reading ability in patients with idiopathic epiretinal membrane (ERM) to evaluate whether measurement of reading performance is a helpful test in addition to visual acuity (VA) as an assessment measure. Methods: This prospective observational study involved 42 eyes of 40 patients with idiopathic ERM. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), reading ability, and metamorphopsia score were evaluated at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months post-surgery. As the outcome measure, the reading ability of each patient (i.e., overall performance) was examined with MNREAD-J, the Japanese version of the MNREAD reading acuity (RA) charts, to determine RA, critical print size (CPS), and maximum reading speed (MRS). Generally, a difference of 0.2 logMAR or more is considered a significant change in BCVA. Thus, as a subgroup analysis, we additionally evaluated the BCVA and reading ability of the patients with a BCVA difference of 0.1 logMAR or less between at baseline and at 12 months post-surgery. Results: Relative to their values at baseline, the subjects exhibited significantly improved BCVA, RA, and CPS throughout the post-surgery examination period (P < 0.001) and significantly improved MRS at 12 months postsurgery (P = 0.04). No significant change in the vertical metamorphopsia score was observed throughout the postsurgery follow-up period. However, and compared to the value at baseline, significant improvements in the horizontal metamorphopsia score were observed at 3, 6 (P < 0.05), and 12 months (P < 0.001) post-surgery. In the subgroup analysis of the 23 eyes that exhibited a BCVA improvement of 0.1 logMAR or less, the median BCVA did not change, but the median RA and CPS improved by 0.2 logMAR. Conclusions: Our findings showed that the surgical removal of ERM improves reading ability, even when the BCVA score does not improve. The measurement of reading performance appears to be a helpful test in addition to VA as a measure for assessing the surgical removal of ERM.

show abstract

“…Reading aloud rate as a function of age based on the MNread test (each dot is a different study; the darker the dot, the more participants were tested) Source:Calabrèse et al (2016) An alternative to the MNread test is the Radner Reading Charts(Radner, Obermayer, Richter- Mueksch, Willinger, Velikay-Parel, & Eisenwort, 2002), also available for several languages.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate

Brysbaert

2019

Journal of Memory and Language

277

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

had a reading rate of 3.9 words per second (234 wpm), the latter a rate of 7.3 words per second (438 wpm). Unfortunately, no information was given about how reading rate had been established. This encouraged Huey (1901) to reassess the issue. He selected 11 pages from an interesting novel, each containing 405 words, which presented no peculiar difficulties to the reader. Twenty university students were asked to read one page at a time while Huey measured the time with a stopwatch. There were 10 conditions. One was normal silent reading ("the way you like to read"). This rate was assessed twice. Another condition was to read silently as fast as possible, while still being able to follow the story line. Two other conditions of interest were reading aloud at a normal pace and at a maximal pace. 1 Huey reported reading rates of 5.35 and 5.91 words per second for silent normal reading (321 and 355 wpm), 8.21 words per second for silent maximal reading (493 wpm), 3.55 words per second for normal reading aloud (213 wpm), and 4.58 words per second for maximal reading aloud (275 wpm). The experiment was included in Huey's hugely influential book The psychology and pedagogy of reading (Huey, 1908), together with the data of Quantz (1898). As such, the very first estimates of normal silent reading were set between 300 and 350 wpm. Tinker An experimental psychologist very active in reading research in the first half of the 20 th century was Tinker. He published a series of over 20 papers addressing various variables that may affect reading speed, such as letter font and various layout options. In most of these studies he used the Chapman-Cook Speed of Reading test. It had two forms, each containing 30 paragraphs of 30 words. Toward the end of the paragraph there was an awkward word spoiling the paragraph. Participants had to tick off the word and finish as many paragraphs as possible in 1.75 minutes. An example of a paragraph was: "Yesterday I went downtown to buy some shoes and rubbers, but when I got home, I found I had forgotten to go to the flower-store to get them." University undergraduates typically finished some 18 paragraphs (540 words) in 1.75 minutes, making a reading speed of 309 wpm. In one of the rare studies taking longer than 1.75 minutes per condition, Tinker (1955) asked his participants to do the task for 30 minutes. They finished on average 317 paragraphs, given a reading rate of 317 wpm (30 words per paragraph and 30 minutes cancelling each other out). Unfortunately, the task was less than optimal, because the * means that the article is part of the meta-analyses

show abstract

Baseline MNREAD Measures for Normally Sighted Subjects From Childhood to Old Age

Cited by 78 publications

References 46 publications

Benefits of low vision aids to reading accessibility

Benefits of low vision aids to reading accessibility

Evaluation of pre- and post-surgery reading ability in patients with epiretinal membrane: a prospective observational study

How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About