Cargando…

Validation of Digital Applications for Evaluation of Visual Parameters: A Narrative Review

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 e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mena-Guevara, Kevin J., Piñero, David P., de Fez, Dolores
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8628957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34842847
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision5040058
_version_ 1784607106065760256
author Mena-Guevara, Kevin J.
Piñero, David P.
de Fez, Dolores
author_facet Mena-Guevara, Kevin J.
Piñero, David P.
de Fez, Dolores
author_sort Mena-Guevara, Kevin J.
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8628957
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86289572021-11-30 Validation of Digital Applications for Evaluation of Visual Parameters: A Narrative Review Mena-Guevara, Kevin J. Piñero, David P. de Fez, Dolores Vision (Basel) Review 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. MDPI 2021-11-24 /pmc/articles/PMC8628957/ /pubmed/34842847 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision5040058 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/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/).
spellingShingle Review
Mena-Guevara, Kevin J.
Piñero, David P.
de Fez, Dolores
Validation of Digital Applications for Evaluation of Visual Parameters: A Narrative Review
title Validation of Digital Applications for Evaluation of Visual Parameters: A Narrative Review
title_full Validation of Digital Applications for Evaluation of Visual Parameters: A Narrative Review
title_fullStr Validation of Digital Applications for Evaluation of Visual Parameters: A Narrative Review
title_full_unstemmed Validation of Digital Applications for Evaluation of Visual Parameters: A Narrative Review
title_short Validation of Digital Applications for Evaluation of Visual Parameters: A Narrative Review
title_sort validation of digital applications for evaluation of visual parameters: a narrative review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8628957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34842847
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision5040058
work_keys_str_mv AT menaguevarakevinj validationofdigitalapplicationsforevaluationofvisualparametersanarrativereview
AT pinerodavidp validationofdigitalapplicationsforevaluationofvisualparametersanarrativereview
AT defezdolores validationofdigitalapplicationsforevaluationofvisualparametersanarrativereview