Journal article
Accuracy of Noncycloplegic Retinoscopy, Retinomax Autorefractor, and SureSight Vision Screener for Detecting Significant Refractive Errors
Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, v 55(3), pp 1378-1385
06 Mar 2014
PMID: 24481262
Featured in Collection : UN Sustainable Development Goals @ Drexel
Abstract
PURPOSE. To evaluate, by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, the ability of noncycloplegic retinoscopy (NCR), Retinomax Autorefractor (Retinomax), and SureSight Vision Screener (SureSight) to detect significant refractive errors (RE) among preschoolers.
METHODS. Refraction results of eye care professionals using NCR, Retinomax, and SureSight (n = 2588) and of nurse and lay screeners using Retinomax and SureSight (n = 1452) were compared with masked cycloplegic retinoscopy results. Significant RE was defined as hyperopia greater than +3.25 diopters (D), myopia greater than 2.00 D, astigmatism greater than 1.50 D, and anisometropia greater than 1.00 D interocular difference in hyperopia, greater than 3.00 D interocular difference in myopia, or greater than 1.50 D interocular difference in astigmatism. The ability of each screening test to identify presence, type, and/or severity of significant RE was summarized by the area under the ROC curve (AUC) and calculated from weighted logistic regression models.
RESULTS. For detection of each type of significant RE, AUC of each test was high; AUC was better for detecting the most severe levels of RE than for all REs considered important to detect (AUC 0.97-1.00 vs. 0.92-0.93). The area under the curve of each screening test was high for myopia (AUC 0.97-0.99). Noncycloplegic retinoscopy and Retinomax performed better than SureSight for hyperopia (AUC 0.92-0.99 and 0.90-0.98 vs. 0.85-0.94, P <= 0.02), Retinomax performed better than NCR for astigmatism greater than 1.50 D (AUC 0.95 vs. 0.90, P = 0.01), and SureSight performed better than Retinomax for anisometropia (AUC 0.85-1.00 vs. 0.76-0.96, P <= 0.07). Performance was similar for nurse and lay screeners in detecting any significant RE (AUC 0.92-1.00 vs. 0.92-0.99).
CONCLUSIONS. Each test had a very high discriminatory power for detecting children with any significant RE.
Metrics
5 Record Views
Details
- Title
- Accuracy of Noncycloplegic Retinoscopy, Retinomax Autorefractor, and SureSight Vision Screener for Detecting Significant Refractive Errors
- Creators
- Marjean Taylor Kulp - The Ohio State UniversityGui-shuang Ying - University of PennsylvaniaJiayan Huang - University of PennsylvaniaMaureen Maguire - University of PennsylvaniaGraham Quinn - Children's Hospital of PhiladelphiaElise B. Ciner - Salus UniversityLynn A. Cyert - Northeastern State UniversityDeborah A. Orel-Bixler - University of California, BerkeleyBruce D. Moore - New England College of Optometry
- Publication Details
- Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, v 55(3), pp 1378-1385
- Publisher
- ARVO Journals
- Number of pages
- 8
- Grant note
- U10EY012644 / NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE; United States Department of Health & Human Services; National Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA; NIH National Eye Institute (NEI) U10EY12644; U10EY12547; U10EY12545; U10EY12550; U10EY12534; U10EY12647; U10EY12648; R21EY018908 / Eye Institute/National Institutes of Health DHHS
- Resource Type
- Journal article
- Language
- English
- Academic Unit
- Pennsylvania College of Optometry (PCO)
- Web of Science ID
- WOS:000333036500026
- Scopus ID
- 2-s2.0-84895888597
- Other Identifier
- 991022089045804721
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:
InCites Highlights
Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:
- Collaboration types
- Domestic collaboration
- Web of Science research areas
- Ophthalmology