Preferences and Reading Performance of People with Low Vision using a Portable Electronic Magnifier versus a Smartphone Magnification App.
Purpose: People with low vision have difficulty reading. There is a scarcity of reports on whether the use of a portable electronic magnifier (PEM) versus a smartphone magnification app is more efficacious for reading tasks. The purpose of this study was to evaluate reading rates for both a PEM and...
| Publicado en: | Optometry & Visual Performance Vol. 7; no. 1; pp. 53 - 59 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Optometric Extension Program
Mar2019
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=135154449&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 135154449 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 23253479 HOOW jtl: Optometry & Visual Performance issn: 23253479 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Mar2019 vid: 7 iid: 1 pid: 46881 pub: Optometric Extension Program place: Lutherville Timonium, Maryland artinfo: ui: 135154449 135154449 135154449 135154449 ppf: 53 ppct: 6 formats: tig: atl: Preferences and Reading Performance of People with Low Vision using a Portable Electronic Magnifier versus a Smartphone Magnification App. aug: au: Vezinaw, Chloe M. Matchinski, Tracy L. Elias, Saly affil: Illinois College of Optometry, Chicago, Illinois sug: subj: Vision, Subnormal Reading Evaluation Sensory Aids Utilization Mobile Applications Utilization Smartphone Utilization Human Female Male Adult Middle Age Aged Pretest-Posttest Design Assistive Technology Devices Utilization Visual Acuity Activities of Daily Living T-Tests Comparative Studies Descriptive Statistics Correlation Coefficient Rehabilitation of Persons with Vision Loss Funding Source Adult: 19-44 years Middle Aged: 45-64 years Aged: 65+ years Female Male ab: Purpose: People with low vision have difficulty reading. There is a scarcity of reports on whether the use of a portable electronic magnifier (PEM) versus a smartphone magnification app is more efficacious for reading tasks. The purpose of this study was to evaluate reading rates for both a PEM and a smartphone app, as well as to have subjects comment on their preferences between the two devices. Methods: Adults attending a low vision clinic were recruited to participate. The study included a pre-study survey, device training, and a reading assessment and concluded with a post-study survey. The reading assessment was a three-minute reading task done with a PEM and a smartphone magnification app. Results: Fourteen subjects completed the study. Reading rates were found to be higher with the portable electronic magnifier as compared to the magnification app, with a P value of 0.04. Seventy-nine percent of subjects preferred reading with the PEM overall, but 57% of subjects favored the magnification app for short reading tasks. Subjects were found to use their smartphones frequently for a variety of different tasks. Conclusion: Reading rates were faster with a PEM, which was preferred by most subjects. Reading with a magnification app on a smartphone is a good alternative for short reading tasks. The majority of subjects responded that their smartphones were helpful to accomplish their activities of daily living, and they were reliant on their smartphones. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|