Tablet App halometer for the assessment of dysphotopsia

Purpose To assess the validity and repeatability of the Aston Halometer. Setting University clinic, United Kingdom. Design Prospective, repeated-measures experimental study. Methods The halometer comprises a bright light-emitting-diode (LED) glare source in the center of an iPad4. Letters subtending 0.21° (∼0.3 logMAR) were moved centrifugally from the LED in 0.05 degree steps in 8 orientations separated by 45 degrees for each of 4 contrast levels (1000, 500, 100, and 25 Weber contrast units [Cw]) in random order. Bangerter occlusion foils were inserted in front of the right eye to simulate monocular glare conditions in 20 subjects (mean age 27.7 ± 3.1 years). Subjects were positioned 2 meters from the screen in a dark room with the iPad controlled from an iPhone via Bluetooth operated by the researcher. The C-Quant straylight meter was also used with each of the foils to measure the level of straylight over the retina. Halometry and straylight repeatability was assessed at a second visit. Results Halo size increased with the different occlusion foils and target contrasts (F = 29.564, P <.001) as expected and in a pattern similar to straylight measures (F = 80.655, P <0.001). Lower contrast letters showed better sensitivity but larger glare-obscured areas, resulting in ceiling effects caused by the screen's field-of-view, with 500 Cw being the best compromise. Intraobserver and interobserver repeatability of the Aston Halometer was good (500Cw: 0.84 to 0.93 and 0.53 to 0.73) and similar to the straylight meter. Conclusion The halometer provides a sensitive, repeatable way of quantifying a patient-recognized form of disability glare in multiple orientations to add objectivity to subjectively reported discomfort glare.

Technological enhancements to optometric clinical tests

A sizeable amount of the testing in eye care, requires either the identification of targets such as letters to assess functional vision, or the subjective evaluation of imagery by an examiner. Computers can render a variety of different targets on their monitors and can be used to store and analyse ophthalmic images. However, existing computing hardware tends to be large, screen resolutions are often too low, and objective assessments of ophthalmic images unreliable. Recent advances in mobile computing hardware and computer-vision systems can be used to enhance clinical testing in optometry. High resolution touch screens embedded in mobile devices, can render targets at a wide variety of distances and can be used to record and respond to patient responses, automating testing methods. This has opened up new opportunities in computerised near vision testing. Equally, new image processing techniques can be used to increase the validity and reliability of objective computer vision systems. Three novel apps for assessing reading speed, contrast sensitivity and amplitude of accommodation were created by the author to demonstrate the potential of mobile computing to enhance clinical measurement. The reading speed app could present sentences effectively, control illumination and automate the testing procedure for reading speed assessment. Meanwhile the contrast sensitivity app made use of a bit stealing technique and swept frequency target, to rapidly assess a patient’s full contrast sensitivity function at both near and far distances. Finally, customised electronic hardware was created and interfaced to an app on a smartphone device to allow free space amplitude of accommodation measurement. A new geometrical model of the tear film and a ray tracing simulation of a Placido disc topographer were produced to provide insights on the effect of tear film breakdown on ophthalmic images. Furthermore, a new computer vision system, that used a novel eye-lash segmentation technique, was created to demonstrate the potential of computer vision systems for the clinical assessment of tear stability. Studies undertaken by the author to assess the validity and repeatability of the novel apps, found that their repeatability was comparable to, or better, than existing clinical methods for reading speed and contrast sensitivity assessment. Furthermore, the apps offered reduced examination times in comparison to their paper based equivalents. The reading speed and amplitude of accommodation apps correlated highly with existing methods of assessment supporting their validity. Their still remains questions over the validity of using a swept frequency sine-wave target to assess patient’s contrast sensitivity functions as no clinical test provides the range of spatial frequencies and contrasts, nor equivalent assessment at distance and near. A validation study of the new computer vision system found that the authors tear metric correlated better with existing subjective measures of tear film stability than those of a competing computer-vision system. However, repeatability was poor in comparison to the subjective measures due to eye lash interference. The new mobile apps, computer vision system, and studies outlined in this thesis provide further insight into the potential of applying mobile and image processing technology to enhance clinical testing by eye care professionals.

Mobile app reading speed test

Aim: To validate the accuracy and repeatability of a mobile app reading speed test compared with the traditional paper version. Method: Twenty-one subjects wearing their full refractive correction glasses read 14 sentences of decreasing print size between 1.0 and -0.1 logMAR, each consisting of 14 words (Radner reading speed test) at 40 cm with a paper-based chart and twice on iPad charts. Time duration was recorded with a stop watch for the paper chart and on the App itself for the mobile chart allowing critical print size (CPS) and optimal reading speed (ORS) to be derived objectively. Results: The ORS was higher for the mobile app charts (194±29 wpm; 195±25 wpm) compared with the paper chart (166±20 wpm; F=57.000, p<0.001). The CPS was lower for the mobile app charts (0.17±0.20 logMAR; 0.18±0.17 logMAR) compared with the paper chart (0.25±0.17 logMAR; F=5.406, p=0.009). The mobile app test had a mean difference repeatability of 0.30±22.5 wpm, r=0.917 for ORS, and a CPS of 0.0±0.2 logMAR, r=0.769. Conclusions: Repeatability of the app reading speed test is as good (ORS) or better (CPS) than previous studies on the paper test. While the results are not interchangeable with paper-based charts, mobile app tablet-based tests of reading speed are reliable and rapid to perform, with the potential to capture functional visual ability in research studies and clinical practice.

Exploring the optimum step size for defocus curves

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of reducing the number of visual acuity measurements made in a defocus curve on the quality of data quantified. Setting: Midland Eye, Solihull, United Kingdom. Design: Evaluation of a technique. Methods: Defocus curves were constructed by measuring visual acuity on a distance logMAR letter chart, randomizing the test letters between lens presentations. The lens powers evaluated ranged between +1.50 diopters (D) and -5.00 D in 0.50 D steps, which were also presented in a randomized order. Defocus curves were measured binocularly with the Tecnis diffractive, Rezoom refractive, Lentis rotationally asymmetric segmented (+3.00 D addition [add]), and Finevision trifocal multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) implanted bilaterally, and also for the diffractive IOL and refractive or rotationally asymmetric segmented (+3.00 D and +1.50 D adds) multifocal IOLs implanted contralaterally. Relative and absolute range of clear-focus metrics and area metrics were calculated for curves fitted using 0.50 D, 1.00 D, and 1.50 D steps and a near add-specific profile (ie, distance, half the near add, and the full near-add powers). Results: A significant difference in simulated results was found in at least 1 of the relative or absolute range of clear-focus or area metrics for each of the multifocal designs examined when the defocus-curve step size was increased (P<.05). Conclusion: Faster methods of capturing defocus curves from multifocal IOL designs appear to distort the metric results and are therefore not valid. Financial Disclosure: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned. © 2013 ASCRS and ESCRS.

Mobile app Aston contrast sensitivity test

BACKGROUND: Contrast detection is an important aspect of the assessment of visual function; however, clinical tests evaluate limited spatial frequencies and contrasts. This study validates the accuracy and inter-test repeatability of a swept-frequency near and distance mobile app Aston contrast sensitivity test, which overcomes this limitation compared to traditional charts. METHOD: Twenty subjects wearing their full refractive correction underwent contrast sensitivity testing on the new near application (near app), distance app, CSV-1000 and Pelli-Robson charts with full correction and with vision degraded by 0.8 and 0.2 Bangerter degradation foils. In addition repeated measures using the 0.8 occluding foil were taken. RESULTS: The mobile apps (near more than distance, p = 0.005) recorded a higher contrast sensitivity than printed tests (p < 0.001); however, all charts showed a reduction in measured contrast sensitivity with degradation (p < 0.001) and a similar decrease with increasing spatial frequency (interaction > 0.05). Although the coefficient of repeatability was lowest for the Pelli-Robson charts (0.14 log units), the mobile app charts measured more spatial frequencies, took less time and were more repeatable (near: 0.26 to 0.37 log units; distance: 0.34 to 0.39 log units) than the CSV-1000 (0.30 to 0.93 log units). The duration to complete the CSV-1000 was 124 ± 37 seconds, Pelli-Robson 78 ± 27 seconds, near app 53 ± 15 seconds and distance app 107 ± 36 seconds. CONCLUSIONS: While there were differences between charts in contrast levels measured, the new Aston near and distance apps are valid, repeatable and time-efficient method of assessing contrast sensitivity at multiple spatial frequencies.

Justice and prisons policy

The field of justice policy is, of course, a critical one for state activity – indeed, arguably it is the most important field of activity, as the state exercises its ability to develop and enforce its rules, including by depriving individuals of their liberty. Notwithstanding this, scholarship in the field was, for many years, dominated by experts coming from different perspectives of legal studies, rather than political science. Nowadays, that has shifted somewhat, as interest in the activity of constitutional courts in political systems has grown, inspired, for instance, by the work of Martin Shapiro, Alec Stone Sweet, R. Daniel Kelemen and many others (e. g. Shapiro 1988; Shapiro and Stone 1994; Stone Sweet 2000; Shapiro and Stone Sweet 2002; Kelemen 2006).