| Title |
Normative values for a tablet computer-based application to assess chromatic contrast sensitivity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavior Research Methods, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3758/s13428-017-0893-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lakshmi Bodduluri, Mei Ying Boon, Malcolm Ryan, Stephen J. Dain |
| Abstract |
Tablet computer displays are amenable for the development of vision tests in a portable form. Assessing color vision using an easily accessible and portable test may help in the self-monitoring of vision-related changes in ocular/systemic conditions and assist in the early detection of disease processes. Tablet computer-based games were developed with different levels of gamification as a more portable option to assess chromatic contrast sensitivity. Game 1 was designed as a clinical version with no gaming elements. Game 2 was a gamified version of game 1 (added fun elements: feedback, scores, and sounds) and game 3 was a complete game with vision task nested within. The current study aimed to determine the normative values and evaluate repeatability of the tablet computer-based games in comparison with an established test, the Cambridge Colour Test (CCT) Trivector test. Normally sighted individuals [N = 100, median (range) age 19.0 years (18-56 years)] had their chromatic contrast sensitivity evaluated binocularly using the three games and the CCT. Games 1 and 2 and the CCT showed similar absolute thresholds and tolerance intervals, and game 3 had significantly lower values than games 1, 2, and the CCT, due to visual task differences. With the exception of game 3 for blue-yellow, the CCT and tablet computer-based games showed similar repeatability with comparable 95% limits of agreement. The custom-designed games are portable, rapid, and may find application in routine clinical practice, especially for testing younger populations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 14% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 14 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 19% |
| Psychology | 9 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 18 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 February 2019.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#1,981
of 2,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,483
of 323,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#30
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,526 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,237 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.