Discrimination of paediatric acuity test optotypes by 6‐year‐old children

Purpose To compare the discrimination performance of 6‐year‐old children for optotypes from six paediatric visual acuity tests and to fit Luce's Biased Choice Model to the data to estimate the relative similarities and bias for each optotype. Methods Full data sets were collected from 20 typica...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ophthalmic & physiological optics 2023-09, Vol.43 (5), p.964-971
Hauptverfasser: Hussaindeen, Jameel Rizwana, Ramakrishnan, Bhavatharini, Ravi, Aishwarya, SundarRaj, Monisha, Rakshit, Archayeeta, Nosofsky, Robert M., Candy, T. Rowan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 971
container_issue 5
container_start_page 964
container_title Ophthalmic & physiological optics
container_volume 43
creator Hussaindeen, Jameel Rizwana
Ramakrishnan, Bhavatharini
Ravi, Aishwarya
SundarRaj, Monisha
Rakshit, Archayeeta
Nosofsky, Robert M.
Candy, T. Rowan
description Purpose To compare the discrimination performance of 6‐year‐old children for optotypes from six paediatric visual acuity tests and to fit Luce's Biased Choice Model to the data to estimate the relative similarities and bias for each optotype. Methods Full data sets were collected from 20 typically developing 6‐year‐olds who had passed a vision screening. They were presented with single optotypes labelled 6/12 at a distance of 9 m and were asked to identify the optotype using a matching task containing all optotypes from the relevant test. The data were combined to form a confusion matrix for each test and a biased choice model was fitted to the data. Results Median correct performance varied from 40% to 100% across optotypes, with the HOTV test having the highest values. Estimates of the similarity of each pair of optotypes indicated equal values for all pairs in the Landolt C, HOTV, Lea numbers and Tumbling E tests. The values differed for the picture tests, that is Lea Symbols and Allen figures. The estimates of bias for each individual optotype also indicated different values with the picture tests. Conclusions Previous studies of the threshold acuity of young children and adults have indicated differences in acuity estimates across paediatric tests. A recognition acuity task typically requires resolving the difference information between optotypes. The performance of the 6‐year‐olds here reveals variance in similarity and bias values for picture tests, particularly for the Allen figures when compared with the Lea Symbols. Ideally, this analysis should be performed when designing new tests, and these results motivate progression from the use of current picture tests to well calibrated letter or number tests at the earliest possible age.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/opo.13167
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2822706575</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2822706575</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3487-bc66e87cd84aee0e5ed6c7bf6c3b1e4071775e820887c34b96b1118582b4d37f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM1Kw0AQxxdRbK0efAEJeNFD2_1IMtuj1E-o1IOew2YzwS1pNu4mSG4-gs_ok7ja6kFwLjMDP_7M_Ag5ZnTCQk1tYydMsBR2yJDFkIzDInbJkPIwJzGVA3Lg_YpSCgBynwwEcOBMJENyf2m8dmZtatUaW0e2jBqFhVGtMzpSujNtH7Xo28g2rW37Bn2U91H68fbeo3Kh2aqI9LOpCof1IdkrVeXxaNtH5On66nF-O14sb-7mF4uxFrGEca7TFCXoQsYKkWKCRaohL1MtcoYxBQaQoORUBkjE-SzNw5sykTyPCwGlGJGzTW7j7EsXrsvW4Q2sKlWj7XzGJedA0wSSgJ7-QVe2c3W4LlAxcD7jYhao8w2lnfXeYZk1QYpyfcZo9uU4C46zb8eBPdkmdvkai1_yR2oAphvg1VTY_5-ULR-Wm8hP6QCHAg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2847229239</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Discrimination of paediatric acuity test optotypes by 6‐year‐old children</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Hussaindeen, Jameel Rizwana ; Ramakrishnan, Bhavatharini ; Ravi, Aishwarya ; SundarRaj, Monisha ; Rakshit, Archayeeta ; Nosofsky, Robert M. ; Candy, T. Rowan</creator><creatorcontrib>Hussaindeen, Jameel Rizwana ; Ramakrishnan, Bhavatharini ; Ravi, Aishwarya ; SundarRaj, Monisha ; Rakshit, Archayeeta ; Nosofsky, Robert M. ; Candy, T. Rowan</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose To compare the discrimination performance of 6‐year‐old children for optotypes from six paediatric visual acuity tests and to fit Luce's Biased Choice Model to the data to estimate the relative similarities and bias for each optotype. Methods Full data sets were collected from 20 typically developing 6‐year‐olds who had passed a vision screening. They were presented with single optotypes labelled 6/12 at a distance of 9 m and were asked to identify the optotype using a matching task containing all optotypes from the relevant test. The data were combined to form a confusion matrix for each test and a biased choice model was fitted to the data. Results Median correct performance varied from 40% to 100% across optotypes, with the HOTV test having the highest values. Estimates of the similarity of each pair of optotypes indicated equal values for all pairs in the Landolt C, HOTV, Lea numbers and Tumbling E tests. The values differed for the picture tests, that is Lea Symbols and Allen figures. The estimates of bias for each individual optotype also indicated different values with the picture tests. Conclusions Previous studies of the threshold acuity of young children and adults have indicated differences in acuity estimates across paediatric tests. A recognition acuity task typically requires resolving the difference information between optotypes. The performance of the 6‐year‐olds here reveals variance in similarity and bias values for picture tests, particularly for the Allen figures when compared with the Lea Symbols. Ideally, this analysis should be performed when designing new tests, and these results motivate progression from the use of current picture tests to well calibrated letter or number tests at the earliest possible age.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0275-5408</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1475-1313</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1475-1313</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/opo.13167</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37272135</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Acuity ; Adult ; Bias ; Child ; Child, Preschool ; Children ; Estimates ; Humans ; Medical screening ; optotype ; paediatric ; Pediatrics ; Vision Screening - methods ; Vision Tests - methods ; Visual Acuity ; visual development ; Visual discrimination</subject><ispartof>Ophthalmic &amp; physiological optics, 2023-09, Vol.43 (5), p.964-971</ispartof><rights>2023 The Authors. published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd on behalf of College of Optometrists.</rights><rights>2023 The Authors. Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics published by John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd on behalf of College of Optometrists.</rights><rights>2023. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3487-bc66e87cd84aee0e5ed6c7bf6c3b1e4071775e820887c34b96b1118582b4d37f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5559-5326 ; 0000-0002-0387-2985</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fopo.13167$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fopo.13167$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37272135$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hussaindeen, Jameel Rizwana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramakrishnan, Bhavatharini</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ravi, Aishwarya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SundarRaj, Monisha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rakshit, Archayeeta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nosofsky, Robert M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Candy, T. Rowan</creatorcontrib><title>Discrimination of paediatric acuity test optotypes by 6‐year‐old children</title><title>Ophthalmic &amp; physiological optics</title><addtitle>Ophthalmic Physiol Opt</addtitle><description>Purpose To compare the discrimination performance of 6‐year‐old children for optotypes from six paediatric visual acuity tests and to fit Luce's Biased Choice Model to the data to estimate the relative similarities and bias for each optotype. Methods Full data sets were collected from 20 typically developing 6‐year‐olds who had passed a vision screening. They were presented with single optotypes labelled 6/12 at a distance of 9 m and were asked to identify the optotype using a matching task containing all optotypes from the relevant test. The data were combined to form a confusion matrix for each test and a biased choice model was fitted to the data. Results Median correct performance varied from 40% to 100% across optotypes, with the HOTV test having the highest values. Estimates of the similarity of each pair of optotypes indicated equal values for all pairs in the Landolt C, HOTV, Lea numbers and Tumbling E tests. The values differed for the picture tests, that is Lea Symbols and Allen figures. The estimates of bias for each individual optotype also indicated different values with the picture tests. Conclusions Previous studies of the threshold acuity of young children and adults have indicated differences in acuity estimates across paediatric tests. A recognition acuity task typically requires resolving the difference information between optotypes. The performance of the 6‐year‐olds here reveals variance in similarity and bias values for picture tests, particularly for the Allen figures when compared with the Lea Symbols. Ideally, this analysis should be performed when designing new tests, and these results motivate progression from the use of current picture tests to well calibrated letter or number tests at the earliest possible age.</description><subject>Acuity</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Child, Preschool</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Estimates</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical screening</subject><subject>optotype</subject><subject>paediatric</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>Vision Screening - methods</subject><subject>Vision Tests - methods</subject><subject>Visual Acuity</subject><subject>visual development</subject><subject>Visual discrimination</subject><issn>0275-5408</issn><issn>1475-1313</issn><issn>1475-1313</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kM1Kw0AQxxdRbK0efAEJeNFD2_1IMtuj1E-o1IOew2YzwS1pNu4mSG4-gs_ok7ja6kFwLjMDP_7M_Ag5ZnTCQk1tYydMsBR2yJDFkIzDInbJkPIwJzGVA3Lg_YpSCgBynwwEcOBMJENyf2m8dmZtatUaW0e2jBqFhVGtMzpSujNtH7Xo28g2rW37Bn2U91H68fbeo3Kh2aqI9LOpCof1IdkrVeXxaNtH5On66nF-O14sb-7mF4uxFrGEca7TFCXoQsYKkWKCRaohL1MtcoYxBQaQoORUBkjE-SzNw5sykTyPCwGlGJGzTW7j7EsXrsvW4Q2sKlWj7XzGJedA0wSSgJ7-QVe2c3W4LlAxcD7jYhao8w2lnfXeYZk1QYpyfcZo9uU4C46zb8eBPdkmdvkai1_yR2oAphvg1VTY_5-ULR-Wm8hP6QCHAg</recordid><startdate>202309</startdate><enddate>202309</enddate><creator>Hussaindeen, Jameel Rizwana</creator><creator>Ramakrishnan, Bhavatharini</creator><creator>Ravi, Aishwarya</creator><creator>SundarRaj, Monisha</creator><creator>Rakshit, Archayeeta</creator><creator>Nosofsky, Robert M.</creator><creator>Candy, T. Rowan</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5559-5326</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0387-2985</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202309</creationdate><title>Discrimination of paediatric acuity test optotypes by 6‐year‐old children</title><author>Hussaindeen, Jameel Rizwana ; Ramakrishnan, Bhavatharini ; Ravi, Aishwarya ; SundarRaj, Monisha ; Rakshit, Archayeeta ; Nosofsky, Robert M. ; Candy, T. Rowan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3487-bc66e87cd84aee0e5ed6c7bf6c3b1e4071775e820887c34b96b1118582b4d37f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Acuity</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Child, Preschool</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Estimates</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical screening</topic><topic>optotype</topic><topic>paediatric</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>Vision Screening - methods</topic><topic>Vision Tests - methods</topic><topic>Visual Acuity</topic><topic>visual development</topic><topic>Visual discrimination</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hussaindeen, Jameel Rizwana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramakrishnan, Bhavatharini</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ravi, Aishwarya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SundarRaj, Monisha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rakshit, Archayeeta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nosofsky, Robert M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Candy, T. Rowan</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library</collection><collection>Wiley Online Library</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Ophthalmic &amp; physiological optics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hussaindeen, Jameel Rizwana</au><au>Ramakrishnan, Bhavatharini</au><au>Ravi, Aishwarya</au><au>SundarRaj, Monisha</au><au>Rakshit, Archayeeta</au><au>Nosofsky, Robert M.</au><au>Candy, T. Rowan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Discrimination of paediatric acuity test optotypes by 6‐year‐old children</atitle><jtitle>Ophthalmic &amp; physiological optics</jtitle><addtitle>Ophthalmic Physiol Opt</addtitle><date>2023-09</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>43</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>964</spage><epage>971</epage><pages>964-971</pages><issn>0275-5408</issn><issn>1475-1313</issn><eissn>1475-1313</eissn><abstract>Purpose To compare the discrimination performance of 6‐year‐old children for optotypes from six paediatric visual acuity tests and to fit Luce's Biased Choice Model to the data to estimate the relative similarities and bias for each optotype. Methods Full data sets were collected from 20 typically developing 6‐year‐olds who had passed a vision screening. They were presented with single optotypes labelled 6/12 at a distance of 9 m and were asked to identify the optotype using a matching task containing all optotypes from the relevant test. The data were combined to form a confusion matrix for each test and a biased choice model was fitted to the data. Results Median correct performance varied from 40% to 100% across optotypes, with the HOTV test having the highest values. Estimates of the similarity of each pair of optotypes indicated equal values for all pairs in the Landolt C, HOTV, Lea numbers and Tumbling E tests. The values differed for the picture tests, that is Lea Symbols and Allen figures. The estimates of bias for each individual optotype also indicated different values with the picture tests. Conclusions Previous studies of the threshold acuity of young children and adults have indicated differences in acuity estimates across paediatric tests. A recognition acuity task typically requires resolving the difference information between optotypes. The performance of the 6‐year‐olds here reveals variance in similarity and bias values for picture tests, particularly for the Allen figures when compared with the Lea Symbols. Ideally, this analysis should be performed when designing new tests, and these results motivate progression from the use of current picture tests to well calibrated letter or number tests at the earliest possible age.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>37272135</pmid><doi>10.1111/opo.13167</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5559-5326</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0387-2985</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0275-5408
ispartof Ophthalmic & physiological optics, 2023-09, Vol.43 (5), p.964-971
issn 0275-5408
1475-1313
1475-1313
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2822706575
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library
subjects Acuity
Adult
Bias
Child
Child, Preschool
Children
Estimates
Humans
Medical screening
optotype
paediatric
Pediatrics
Vision Screening - methods
Vision Tests - methods
Visual Acuity
visual development
Visual discrimination
title Discrimination of paediatric acuity test optotypes by 6‐year‐old children
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T00%3A28%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Discrimination%20of%20paediatric%20acuity%20test%20optotypes%20by%206%E2%80%90year%E2%80%90old%20children&rft.jtitle=Ophthalmic%20&%20physiological%20optics&rft.au=Hussaindeen,%20Jameel%20Rizwana&rft.date=2023-09&rft.volume=43&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=964&rft.epage=971&rft.pages=964-971&rft.issn=0275-5408&rft.eissn=1475-1313&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/opo.13167&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2822706575%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2847229239&rft_id=info:pmid/37272135&rfr_iscdi=true