A recent study introduced a novel method for estimating visual acuity without a traditional Snellen or logMAR chart. The research, conducted across multiple centers, aimed to determine whether simple yes/no questions about visual tasks could reliably predict visual acuity. This approach has potential applications in telehealth and remote care, particularly for patients who may not have access to traditional vision testing tools.

The study involved 385 participants with a range of visual capabilities, from normal vision to low vision. The 100-question survey was designed to gauge the participants’ ability to perform everyday visual tasks, such as reading street signs, recognizing faces, or seeing fine details on a television screen. “The questions were selected to span a wide range of demands on acuity,” the researchers explain in their article published in Translational Vision Science & Technology. These self-reported abilities were then compared to formal visual acuity measurements obtained using traditional methods.

The researchers categorized the visual tasks into different difficulty levels, creating a scoring system designed to correlate with visual acuity (VA), to determine whether patient-reported outcomes could serve as a proxy for VA measurements.

The study found a significant correlation between self-reported visual task performance and measured VA, with a correlation coefficient of -0.72. This result suggests that asking patients about their daily visual abilities can provide a reasonably accurate estimate of their actual VA. The average unsigned prediction error between the estimated and measured VA was 0.24 logMAR, indicating that, while not as precise as traditional methods, the self-reported method provides a fairly accurate estimate of VA, particularly in individuals with low vision.

“Although the questions in our survey were designed to target participants’ VA, it is likely that other factors, such as contrast sensitivity, also influenced their responses,” the researchers note. “Among the subset of participants with contrast sensitivity measured (n = 291), we found a correlation of −0.51 (P < 0.001) between VA and contrast sensitivity, consistent with previous findings.”

The researchers emphasize that, while this method cannot replace traditional VA assessments, it provides an accessible way to monitor vision changes in remote settings or for patients with mobility issues.

A full list of author disclosures can be found in the published research.