Development and validation of a new method for visual acuity assesment on tablet in pediatric population: eMOVA test

3Citations
Citations of this article
39Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Amblyopia is a major public health concern. Its screening and management require reliable methods of visual acuity assessment. New technologies offer nowadays many tests available on different app stores for smartphone or tablet but most of them often lack of scientific validation for a medical use. The aim of our study was to attempt validating a tablet-based near visual acuity test adapted to the pediatric population: the eMOVA test (electronic Measurement Of Visual Acuity) by comparing visual acuity measured with more conventional test. Methods: A cohort of 100 children aged 3 to 8 attending the ophthalmic-pediatric for eye examination between September 2016 and June 2017 were included in the study. Near visual acuity was assessed on participants using both the eMOVA test and a Standard test (Rossano-Weiss test). Duration of each test, its comprehension, its acceptability and the attention of the child during the test was also investigated. Results: The eMOVA test overestimated near visual acuity by 0.06 logMAR. This difference, statistically significant, was not clinically relevant. The duration of the eMOVA test was longer than the reference test, but less discomfort and preferred by children and their parents compared to standard tests. Conclusion: The eMOVA test appears as a reliable test to assess near visual acuity in children. By its portability and efficiency, this application proved to be a relevant tool to be used for children eye examination in daily routine at the hospital.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Stoll, N., Di Foggia, E., Speeg-Schatz, C., Meunier, H., Rimele, A., Ancé, P., … Sauer, A. (2022). Development and validation of a new method for visual acuity assesment on tablet in pediatric population: eMOVA test. BMC Ophthalmology, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-022-02360-8

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free