2003
DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(03)00394-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Repeatability of an automated Landolt C test, compared with the early treatment of diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) chart testing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

6
22
0
4

Year Published

2004
2004
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
6
22
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Comparing nasal vs temporal presentations, or superior vs inferior, we observed no significant differences at any eccentricity with a two-tailed, paired t-test at Po0.05, results similar to that of prior studies. 32,39,[44][45][46] Refixations may potentially produce artifacts in the measurement of the acuities at the locations close to fixation. However, for an eccentric stimulus to initiate a saccade in the appropriate direction, it must persist for at least a minimum time of 100-120 ms for detection, 47 after which the saccade would require B20-35 ms to complete the refixation over the angular distance, and thereafter, the target must remain for at least 150-180 m for discriminatory function to ascertain the correct C orientation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comparing nasal vs temporal presentations, or superior vs inferior, we observed no significant differences at any eccentricity with a two-tailed, paired t-test at Po0.05, results similar to that of prior studies. 32,39,[44][45][46] Refixations may potentially produce artifacts in the measurement of the acuities at the locations close to fixation. However, for an eccentric stimulus to initiate a saccade in the appropriate direction, it must persist for at least a minimum time of 100-120 ms for detection, 47 after which the saccade would require B20-35 ms to complete the refixation over the angular distance, and thereafter, the target must remain for at least 150-180 m for discriminatory function to ascertain the correct C orientation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the term 'coefficient of repeatability' has been adopted to describe this statistical technique. Ruamviboonsuk et al 46 use the coefficient of repeatability in comparing test-retest reliability between two visual acuity tests. However, no mention was made regarding whether the SD was unrelated to the magnitude of the score (a necessary assumption to use coefficient of repeatability).…”
Section: Coefficients Of Repeatabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since then, FrACT has been used in a number of studies, while being continuously further developed based on the feedback of numerous vision researchers, optometrists and ophthalmologists. Other approaches emulated the ETDRS charts [18] or were variants of the FrACT approach [16]. ETDRS and FrACT results were recently compared in this laboratory and found to agree closely [19].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%