Validation of Digital Applications for Evaluation of Visual Parameters: A Narrative Review
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10045/119670
Title: | Validation of Digital Applications for Evaluation of Visual Parameters: A Narrative Review |
---|---|
Authors: | Mena-Guevara, Kevin J. | Piñero, David P. | Fez Saiz, Dolores de |
Research Group/s: | Grupo de Óptica y Percepción Visual (GOPV) |
Center, Department or Service: | Universidad de Alicante. Departamento de Óptica, Farmacología y Anatomía |
Keywords: | Visual function | App | Electronic device | Visual acuity | Tablet | Contrast sensitivity |
Knowledge Area: | Óptica |
Issue Date: | 24-Nov-2021 |
Publisher: | MDPI |
Citation: | Mena-Guevara KJ, Piñero DP, de Fez D. Validation of Digital Applications for Evaluation of Visual Parameters: A Narrative Review. Vision. 2021; 5(4):58. https://doi.org/10.3390/vision5040058 |
Abstract: | The current review aimed to collect and critically analyze the scientific peer-reviewed literature that is available about the use of digital applications for evaluation of visual parameters in electronic devices (tablets and smartphones), confirming if there are studies calibrating and validating each of these applications. Three bibliographic search engines (using the search equation described in the paper) and the Mendeley reference manager search engine were used to complete the analysis. Only articles written in English and that are evaluating the use of tests in healthy patients to measure or characterize any visual function aspects using tablets or smartphones were included. Articles using electronic visual tests to assess the results of surgical procedures or are conducted in pathological conditions were excluded. A total of 19 articles meeting these inclusion and exclusion criteria were finally analyzed. One critical point of all these studies is that there was no mention of the characterization (spatial and/or colorimetrical) of screens and the stimuli used in most of them. Only two studies described some level of calibration of the digital device before the beginning of the study. Most revised articles described non-controlled comparatives studies (73.7%), reporting some level of scientific evidence on the validation of tools, although more consistent studies are needed. |
Sponsor: | The author David P. Piñero has been supported by the Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness of Spain within the program Ramón y Cajal, RYC-2016-20471. |
URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/10045/119670 |
ISSN: | 2411-5150 |
DOI: | 10.3390/vision5040058 |
Language: | eng |
Type: | info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
Rights: | © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
Peer Review: | si |
Publisher version: | https://doi.org/10.3390/vision5040058 |
Appears in Collections: | INV - GOPV - Artículos de Revistas |
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Mena-Guevara_etal_2021_Vision.pdf | 600,55 kB | Adobe PDF | Open Preview | |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License