Analysis of methods for predicting near-magnification power.
BACKGROUND
Data were analyzed from 25 consecutive patient visits to the Low Vision Rehabilitation Service at Southern College of Optometry, during which magnification for near was recommended.


METHODS
Linear regressions with analysis of variances were calculated for the results obtained from four near-different near-magnification prediction-calculation methods to determine how accurately they predicted the final near recommended magnifications. A t-test was performed to look for mean differences between calculation methods.


RESULTS
No significance was found between the means of three of the calculation methods; a significant difference was found for one. However, all four near-magnification calculation methods significantly predicted final near magnification.


CONCLUSIONS
Low-vision rehabilitation clinicians may feel comfortable using any of the four near-magnification methods Choice of method may be a reflection of previous method usage by the clinician. Use of the Lighthouse Near Acuity Test Chart reduces the need to calculate the near-magnification power with which to begin near-magnification testing.
Elam
J H
JH
Low Vision Clinic Southern College of Optometry, Memphis, TN 38104, USA.
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001296:Audiovisual Aids; D002648:Child; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009907:Optometry / Q000379:methods*; D014787:Vision Tests / Q000295:instrumentation*; D015354:Vision, Low / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D014792:Visual Acuity