Mobile app reading speed test

Aim To validate the accuracy and repeatability of a mobile app reading speed test compared with the traditional paper version. Method Twenty-one subjects wearing their full refractive correction glasses read 14 sentences of decreasing print size between 1.0 and −0.1 logMAR, each consisting of 14 words (Radner reading speed test) at 40 cm with a paper-based chart and twice on iPad charts. Time duration was recorded with a stop watch for the paper chart and on the App itself for the mobile chart allowing critical print size (CPS) and optimal reading speed (ORS) to be derived objectively. Results The ORS was higher for the mobile app charts (194±29 wpm; 195±25 wpm) compared with the paper chart (166±20 wpm; F=57.000, p<0.001). The CPS was lower for the mobile app charts (0.17±0.20 logMAR; 0.18±0.17 logMAR) compared with the paper chart (0.25±0.17 logMAR; F=5.406, p=0.009). The mobile app test had a mean difference repeatability of 0.30±22.5 wpm, r=0.917 for ORS, and a CPS of 0.0±0.2 logMAR, r=0.769. Conclusions Repeatability of the app reading speed test is as good (ORS) or better (CPS) than previous studies on the paper test. While the results are not interchangeable with paper-based charts, mobile app tablet-based tests of reading speed are reliable and rapid to perform, with the potential to capture functional visual ability in research studies and clinical practice.

[1]  Shahina Pardhan,et al.  The Repeatability of MNREAD Acuity Charts and Variability at Different Test Distances , 2006, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[2]  Franz König,et al.  Reliability of a standardized reading chart system: variance component analysis, test-retest and inter-chart reliability , 2004, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[3]  Gary S Rubin,et al.  Measuring reading performance , 2013, Vision Research.

[4]  M Velikay-Parel,et al.  [A new reading chart for simultaneous determination of reading vision and reading speed]. , 1998, Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde.

[5]  G. Rubin,et al.  Description and validation of a test to evaluate sustained silent reading. , 2013, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[6]  Laura Remón,et al.  Designing a new test for contrast sensitivity function measurement with iPad. , 2015, Journal of optometry.

[7]  G. Legge,et al.  Nonlinear mixed-effects modeling of MNREAD data. , 2008, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[8]  J. G. Strong,et al.  Demographic characteristics of the vision-disabled elderly. , 1997, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[9]  GORDON E. LEGGE,et al.  Psychophysics of Reading. VIII. The Minnesota Low- Vision Reading Test , 1989, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[10]  B Thompson,et al.  An assessment of the iPad as a testing platform for distance visual acuity in adults , 2013, BMJ Open.

[11]  Ulrike Willinger,et al.  Eine neue Lesetafel* zur gleichzeitigen Bestimmung von Lesevisus und Lesegeschwindigkeit , 1998 .

[12]  Alois K Dexl,et al.  Device for improving quantification of reading acuity and reading speed. , 2010, Journal of refractive surgery.

[13]  Humza J. Tahir,et al.  An assessment of a modern touch-screen tablet computer with reference to core physical characteristics necessary for clinical vision testing , 2013, Journal of The Royal Society Interface.