Feedback improves measured visual acuity in adults

Andrew V. Collins, Muthana Noori, Robert J. Jacobs, Nicola ANSTICE

Research output: Contribution to journalMeeting Abstract

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Visual acuity (VA) is used in clinical practice for both screening and measuring visual function. Many factors must be standardized to obtain valid and repeatable VA measures and this study aimed to quantify the effects of providing different levels of feedback during VA assessment. Methods: Single, crowded Sloan letters (ETDRS and HOTV sets) were presented on the Electronic Visual Acuity (EVA) system to 14 visually-normal adults. Three different levels of feedback were given: (1) no feedback, (2) whether the response was correct or incorrect (minimum feedback), and (3) correction of incorrect responses (maximum feedback). Measurements were performed on each participant twice to assess the effect of feedback on test-retest reliability. Results: There was no significant difference in measured VA between the no feedback and minimum feedback conditions (0.00 logMAR, p = 0.463). Measured VA was significantly better when maximum feedback was provided (0.04 logMAR and 0.05 logMAR; p < 0.0001) when compared with no and minimum feedback, respectively. VA improved between measurement sessions 1 and 2 (0.025 logMAR better in second session; p = 0.024). In session 2, level of feedback provided was not significant (p = 0.3782) suggesting that the learning effect from maximum feedback happened at the first visit and was retained at the second visit. Conclusions: At threshold size, recognition of letters depends on the ability to resolve limbs and gaps in the optotype and is assisted by the overall shape of the letter. Correcting incorrect responses allows adults to become more familiar with the shape of the letter at small sizes, increasing measured VA. Repeatability of VA measures will be improved if there is a consistent level of feedback provided.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-1
Number of pages1
JournalInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science
Volume59
Issue number9
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

Visual Acuity
Aptitude
Reproducibility of Results
Extremities
Learning

Cite this

Collins, Andrew V. ; Noori, Muthana ; Jacobs, Robert J. ; ANSTICE, Nicola. / Feedback improves measured visual acuity in adults. In: Investigative ophthalmology & visual science. 2018 ; Vol. 59, No. 9. pp. 1-1.
@article{5f0e66116dba4aae8db56ece190d372a,
title = "Feedback improves measured visual acuity in adults",
abstract = "Purpose: Visual acuity (VA) is used in clinical practice for both screening and measuring visual function. Many factors must be standardized to obtain valid and repeatable VA measures and this study aimed to quantify the effects of providing different levels of feedback during VA assessment. Methods: Single, crowded Sloan letters (ETDRS and HOTV sets) were presented on the Electronic Visual Acuity (EVA) system to 14 visually-normal adults. Three different levels of feedback were given: (1) no feedback, (2) whether the response was correct or incorrect (minimum feedback), and (3) correction of incorrect responses (maximum feedback). Measurements were performed on each participant twice to assess the effect of feedback on test-retest reliability. Results: There was no significant difference in measured VA between the no feedback and minimum feedback conditions (0.00 logMAR, p = 0.463). Measured VA was significantly better when maximum feedback was provided (0.04 logMAR and 0.05 logMAR; p < 0.0001) when compared with no and minimum feedback, respectively. VA improved between measurement sessions 1 and 2 (0.025 logMAR better in second session; p = 0.024). In session 2, level of feedback provided was not significant (p = 0.3782) suggesting that the learning effect from maximum feedback happened at the first visit and was retained at the second visit. Conclusions: At threshold size, recognition of letters depends on the ability to resolve limbs and gaps in the optotype and is assisted by the overall shape of the letter. Correcting incorrect responses allows adults to become more familiar with the shape of the letter at small sizes, increasing measured VA. Repeatability of VA measures will be improved if there is a consistent level of feedback provided.",
keywords = "Corticosteroids, Drug differentiation, Intravitreal drug delivery, Retinal disease",
author = "Collins, {Andrew V.} and Muthana Noori and Jacobs, {Robert J.} and Nicola ANSTICE",
year = "2018",
language = "English",
volume = "59",
pages = "1--1",
journal = "Investigative Ophthalmology",
issn = "0146-0404",
publisher = "Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology Inc.",
number = "9",

}

Feedback improves measured visual acuity in adults. / Collins, Andrew V.; Noori, Muthana; Jacobs, Robert J.; ANSTICE, Nicola.

In: Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, Vol. 59, No. 9, 2018, p. 1-1.

Research output: Contribution to journalMeeting Abstract

TY - JOUR

T1 - Feedback improves measured visual acuity in adults

AU - Collins, Andrew V.

AU - Noori, Muthana

AU - Jacobs, Robert J.

AU - ANSTICE, Nicola

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Purpose: Visual acuity (VA) is used in clinical practice for both screening and measuring visual function. Many factors must be standardized to obtain valid and repeatable VA measures and this study aimed to quantify the effects of providing different levels of feedback during VA assessment. Methods: Single, crowded Sloan letters (ETDRS and HOTV sets) were presented on the Electronic Visual Acuity (EVA) system to 14 visually-normal adults. Three different levels of feedback were given: (1) no feedback, (2) whether the response was correct or incorrect (minimum feedback), and (3) correction of incorrect responses (maximum feedback). Measurements were performed on each participant twice to assess the effect of feedback on test-retest reliability. Results: There was no significant difference in measured VA between the no feedback and minimum feedback conditions (0.00 logMAR, p = 0.463). Measured VA was significantly better when maximum feedback was provided (0.04 logMAR and 0.05 logMAR; p < 0.0001) when compared with no and minimum feedback, respectively. VA improved between measurement sessions 1 and 2 (0.025 logMAR better in second session; p = 0.024). In session 2, level of feedback provided was not significant (p = 0.3782) suggesting that the learning effect from maximum feedback happened at the first visit and was retained at the second visit. Conclusions: At threshold size, recognition of letters depends on the ability to resolve limbs and gaps in the optotype and is assisted by the overall shape of the letter. Correcting incorrect responses allows adults to become more familiar with the shape of the letter at small sizes, increasing measured VA. Repeatability of VA measures will be improved if there is a consistent level of feedback provided.

AB - Purpose: Visual acuity (VA) is used in clinical practice for both screening and measuring visual function. Many factors must be standardized to obtain valid and repeatable VA measures and this study aimed to quantify the effects of providing different levels of feedback during VA assessment. Methods: Single, crowded Sloan letters (ETDRS and HOTV sets) were presented on the Electronic Visual Acuity (EVA) system to 14 visually-normal adults. Three different levels of feedback were given: (1) no feedback, (2) whether the response was correct or incorrect (minimum feedback), and (3) correction of incorrect responses (maximum feedback). Measurements were performed on each participant twice to assess the effect of feedback on test-retest reliability. Results: There was no significant difference in measured VA between the no feedback and minimum feedback conditions (0.00 logMAR, p = 0.463). Measured VA was significantly better when maximum feedback was provided (0.04 logMAR and 0.05 logMAR; p < 0.0001) when compared with no and minimum feedback, respectively. VA improved between measurement sessions 1 and 2 (0.025 logMAR better in second session; p = 0.024). In session 2, level of feedback provided was not significant (p = 0.3782) suggesting that the learning effect from maximum feedback happened at the first visit and was retained at the second visit. Conclusions: At threshold size, recognition of letters depends on the ability to resolve limbs and gaps in the optotype and is assisted by the overall shape of the letter. Correcting incorrect responses allows adults to become more familiar with the shape of the letter at small sizes, increasing measured VA. Repeatability of VA measures will be improved if there is a consistent level of feedback provided.

KW - Corticosteroids

KW - Drug differentiation

KW - Intravitreal drug delivery

KW - Retinal disease

M3 - Meeting Abstract

VL - 59

SP - 1

EP - 1

JO - Investigative Ophthalmology

JF - Investigative Ophthalmology

SN - 0146-0404

IS - 9

ER -