Back

AIM (Angular Indication Measurement) paradigm: Adaptive, self-administered, and generalizable vision assessment used to measure visual acuity

Skerswetat, J.; He, J.; Shah, J. B.; Aycardi, N.; Bex, P. J.

2023-02-27 neuroscience
10.1101/2023.02.25.529586 bioRxiv
Show abstract

This proof-of-concept study introduces Angular Indication Measurement and applies it to VA (AIM-VA). First, we compared the ability of AIM-VA and ETDRS to detect defocus and astigmatic blur in 22 normally-sighted adults. Spherical and cylindrical lenses ({+/-}0.00D, +0.25D, +0.50D, +0.75D, +1.00D, +2.00D and +0.50D, +1.00D, +2.00D each at 0{degrees}, 90{degrees}, 135{degrees}, respectively) in the dominant eye induced blur. Second, we compared repeatability over two tests of AIM-VA and ETDRS. A 2-way-ANOVA showed a main effect for defocus-blur and test with no interaction. A 3-way-ANOVA for the astigmatism experiment revealed main effects for test type, blur, and direction and with no interactions. Planned multiple comparisons showed AIM had greater astigmatic-induced VA loss than ETDRS. Bland-Altman plots showed small bias and no systematic learning effect for either test type and improved repeatability with >2 adaptive steps for AIM-VA. AIM-VAs ability to detect defocus was comparable with that of an ETDRS letter chart and showed greater sensitivity to astigmatic blur, and AIM-VAs repeatability is comparable with ETDRS when using 2 or more adaptive steps. AIMs self-administered orientation judgment approach is generalizable to interrogate other visual functions, e.g., contrast, color, motion, stereo-vision.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.