comparison between refraction measured by spot vision screeningtm and subjective clinical refractometry

Clicks: 378
ID: 212180
2016
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #13 of 128 articles by views in icitacee 2015 - 2nd international conference on information technology, computer, and electrical engineering: green technology strengthening in information technology, electrical and computer engineering implementation, proceedings

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 128 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of Spot Vision ScreeningTM as an autorefractor by comparing refraction measurements to subjective clinical refractometry results in children and adult patients. METHODS: One-hundred and thirty-four eyes of 134 patients were submitted to refractometry by Spot and clinical refractometry under cycloplegia. Patients, students, physicians, staff and children of staff from the Hospital das Clínicas (School of Medicine, University of São Paulo) aged 7-50 years without signs of ocular disease were examined. Only right-eye refraction data were analyzed. The findings were converted in magnitude vectors for analysis. RESULTS: The difference between Spot Vision ScreeningTM and subjective clinical refractometry expressed in spherical equivalents was +0.66±0.56 diopters (D), +0.16±0.27 D for the vector projected on the 90 axis and +0.02±0.15 D for the oblique vector. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the statistical significance of the difference between the two methods, we consider the difference non-relevant in a clinical setting, supporting the use of Spot Vision ScreeningTM as an ancillary method for estimating refraction.
Reference Key
jesus2016clinicscomparison Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Daniela Lima de Jesus;Flávio Fernandes Villela;Luis Fernando Orlandin;Fernando Naves Eiji;Daniel Oliveira Dantas;Milton Ruiz Alves
Journal icitacee 2015 - 2nd international conference on information technology, computer, and electrical engineering: green technology strengthening in information technology, electrical and computer engineering implementation, proceedings
Year 2016
DOI
10.6061/clinics/2016(02)03
URL
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-59322016000200069&lng=en&tlng=en
Keywords
ocular equipment design comparative studymedicine (general)

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.