Investigating the repeatability and behavioral relationships of acuity, contrast sensitivity, form, and motion perception measurements using a novel tablet- based vision test tool
Jan Skerswetat, Peter Bex, Jonathan Green, Gunnar Schmidtmann
Introduction: Visual function tests are important in basic and clinical vision research but are typically limited to very few aspects of human vision, coarse diagnostic resolution, and a need for an administrator. Recently, the generalizable, response-adaptive, self-administered Angular Indication Measurement (AIM) and Foraging Interactive D-prime (FInD) methods were developed to assess vision across different visual functions. Here, we investigated the repeatability of these methods and investigated the relationship between outcomes.
Methods: 31 healthy participants (mean age: 39.7 ± 11.7; 13 females) were recruited. AIM and FInD platforms show a range of visual stimuli per display (4x4 stimuli) spanning ±2σ around an adaptively estimated perceptual threshold across multiple displays (e.g., Skerswetat et al., 2024, IOVS). Repeatability of near visual acuity, contrast sensitivity function (CSF), and form & motion coherence tasks were deployed on a tablet using both eyes. Bland-Altman analyses were performed to calculate the Coefficient of Repeatability (precision) and Mean Bias (accuracy). Linear regressions and hierarchal cluster analysis were used to investigate the relationship between outcome parameters.
Results: Table 1 shows the repeatability for all visual functions. AIM Form Coherence and FInD Form horizontal coherence showed significant retest bias; all other tests were bias-free. Cluster analysis revealed overall clustering of CSF, form and motion outcomes (Figure 1). There were significant correlations within CSF and between motion coherence outcomes but few significant correlations between form coherence outcomes (Figure 1).
Conclusions: AIM and FInD near vision tests are generalizable across multiple visual functions and are precise and reliable. Most functions tested were bias- free. Contrast, form, and motion outcomes clustered together, and contrast and motion outcomes correlated with one another. The combination of a generalizable, response-adaptive, and self-administered approach may be a suitable set of tests for basic science and clinical use cases.
