A systematic review of reading tests

被引:0
|
作者
Panagiota Ntonti [1 ]
Christina Mitsi [1 ]
Eleftherios Chatzimichael [1 ]
Eirini-Kanella Panagiotopoulou [1 ]
Minas Bakirtzis [1 ]
Aristeidis Konstantinidis [1 ]
Georgios Labiris [1 ]
机构
[1] Ophthalmology Department, University Hospital of Alexandroupolis
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
R770.4 [眼科诊断学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Adequate near and intermediate visual capacity is important in performing everyday tasks, especially after the introduction of smartphones and computers in our professional and recreational activities. Primary objective of this study was to review all available reading tests both conventional and digital and explore their integrated characteristics. A systematic review of the recent literature regarding reading charts was performed based on the PubM ed, Google Scholar, and Springer databases between February and March 2021. Data from 11 descriptive and 24 comparative studies were included in the present systematic review. Clinical settings are still dominated by conventional printed reading charts; however, the most prevalent of them(i.e., Jaeger type charts) are not validated. Reliable reading capacity assessment is done only by those that comply with the International Council of Ophthalmology(ICO) recommendations. Digital reading tests are gaining popularity both in clinical and research settings and are differentiated in standard computer-based applications that require installation either in a computer or a tablet(e.g., Advanced VISION Test and web-based ones e.g., Democritus Digital Acuity Reading Test requires no installation). It is evident that validated digital tests will prevail in future clinical or research settings and it is upon ophthalmologists to select the one most compatible with their examination routine.
引用
收藏
页码:121 / 127
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A systematic review of reading tests
    Ntonti, Panagiota
    Mitsi, Christina
    Chatzimichael, Eleftherios
    Panagiotopoulou, Eirini-Kanella
    Bakirtzis, Minas
    Konstantinidis, Aristeidis
    Labiris, Georgios
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2023, 16 (01) : 121 - 127
  • [2] Notes for the reading of a systematic review
    Garcia Lopez, F.
    Quereda, C.
    NEFROLOGIA, 2007, 27 (04): : 417 - 424
  • [3] Reading, writing and systematic review
    Sandelowski, Margarete
    JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, 2008, 64 (01) : 104 - 110
  • [4] TEST REVIEW - WOODCOCK READING MASTERY TESTS
    LAFFEY, JL
    KELLY, D
    READING TEACHER, 1979, 33 (03): : 335 - 339
  • [5] Nonword Reading Tests: A Review of the Available Resources
    Colenbrander, Danielle
    Nickels, Lyndsey
    Kohnen, Saskia
    AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION, 2011, 35 (02) : 137 - 172
  • [6] Systematic review of flexibility tests in gymnastics
    Vernetta, Mercedes
    Maria Pelaez-Barrios, Eva
    Lopez-Bedoya, Jesus
    JOURNAL OF HUMAN SPORT AND EXERCISE, 2022, 17 (01): : 58 - 73
  • [7] Wheelchair skills tests: a systematic review
    Kilkens, OJE
    Post, MWM
    Dallmeijer, AJ
    Seelen, HAM
    van der Woude, LHV
    CLINICAL REHABILITATION, 2003, 17 (04) : 418 - 430
  • [8] Systematic review of timed stair tests
    Nightingale, Elizabeth Jean
    Pourkazemi, Fereshteh
    Hiller, Claire E.
    JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, 2014, 51 (03): : 335 - 350
  • [9] Proficiency tests for laboratories: a systematic review
    de Albano, Filipe Medeiros
    ten Caten, Carla Schwengber
    ACCREDITATION AND QUALITY ASSURANCE, 2014, 19 (04) : 245 - 257
  • [10] Proficiency tests for laboratories: a systematic review
    Filipe Medeiros de Albano
    Carla Schwengber ten Caten
    Accreditation and Quality Assurance, 2014, 19 : 245 - 257