Assessment of Visual Acuity and Stereopsis in Older Adults: A Comparison Between a Screening Application and Clinical Standards—A Feasibility Study

<i>Background and Objectives:</i> Visual impairment and reduced stereovision significantly impact the quality of life and increase fall risk in older adults. While standard clinical assessment of visual functions is essential in this population, its use is often limited by the need for specialized equipment and trained personnel. Tablet-based screening tools offer a practical alternative but require clinical validation. This study aimed to assess the agreement, reliability, and diagnostic performance of a tablet-based screening application (index methods) compared to established clinical reference methods for assessing visual acuity (VA) and stereovision (SV) in adults over 60 years. <i>Materials and Methods:</i> This prospective, non-blinded, cross-sectional, feasibility study included two cohorts: a test-retest group of 24 older adults assessed twice within 7 days, and a clinical cross-sectional group of 135 participants recruited from primary care practices. VA was measured using tablet-based Landolt C test and compared with an ETDRS-style chart, while stereovision was assessed using tablet-based static and dynamic random dot stereograms and compared with the TNO stereotest. Agreement and reliability were evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. <i>Results:</i> The index VA method demonstrated good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.79) with no significant difference between repeated measurements. In the clinical cross-sectional group, visual acuity measurements showed a small mean bias (0.022 logMAR) between the index and reference methods, which remained within clinically acceptable limits, particularly in the intermediate acuity range. For stereovision, the index SV tests showed high test-retest agreement. Using a TNO cutoff of 480 arcsec, the index SV method demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.87 for static and 0.85 for dynamic stimuli) with high sensitivity for detecting impaired stereovision. <i>Conclusions:</i> The tablet-based index method provided reliable and clinically comparable results for VA and SV assessments in older adults, supporting its potential use as a screening tool in primary care and community-based settings.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicina
Published
2026-03-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina62030517
Primary Topic
Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Assessment of Visual Acuity and Stereopsis in Older Adults: A Comparison Between a Screening Application and Clinical Standards—A Feasibility Study

Vanda A. Nemes, Ildikó Telkes, Balázs Patczai, Adrienne Csutak et al.
Medicina
Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
article

Assessment of Visual Acuity and Stereopsis in Older Adults: A Comparison Between a Screening Application and Clinical Standards—A Feasibility Study

Vanda A. Nemes, Ildikó Telkes, Balázs Patczai, Adrienne Csutak, Dorottya Wiegand, Eszter Mikó-Baráth
article en

Abstract

<i>Background and Objectives:</i> Visual impairment and reduced stereovision significantly impact the quality of life and increase fall risk in older adults. While standard clinical assessment of visual functions is essential in this population, its use is often limited by the need for specialized equipment and trained personnel. Tablet-based screening tools offer a practical alternative but require clinical validation. This study aimed to assess the agreement, reliability, and diagnostic performance of a tablet-based screening application (index methods) compared to established clinical reference methods for assessing visual acuity (VA) and stereovision (SV) in adults over 60 years. <i>Materials and Methods:</i> This prospective, non-blinded, cross-sectional, feasibility study included two cohorts: a test-retest group of 24 older adults assessed twice within 7 days, and a clinical cross-sectional group of 135 participants recruited from primary care practices. VA was measured using tablet-based Landolt C test and compared with an ETDRS-style chart, while stereovision was assessed using tablet-based static and dynamic random dot stereograms and compared with the TNO stereotest. Agreement and reliability were evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. <i>Results:</i> The index VA method demonstrated good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.79) with no significant difference between repeated measurements. In the clinical cross-sectional group, visual acuity measurements showed a small mean bias (0.022 logMAR) between the index and reference methods, which remained within clinically acceptable limits, particularly in the intermediate acuity range. For stereovision, the index SV tests showed high test-retest agreement. Using a TNO cutoff of 480 arcsec, the index SV method demonstrated good diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.87 for static and 0.85 for dynamic stimuli) with high sensitivity for detecting impaired stereovision. <i>Conclusions:</i> The tablet-based index method provided reliable and clinically comparable results for VA and SV assessments in older adults, supporting its potential use as a screening tool in primary care and community-based settings.

MedicinaVol. 62(3)
University of Pecs (HU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 27%
Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.