title: Visual Acuity Testing: Feedback Affects Neither Outcome nor Reproducibility, but Leaves Participants Happier.
abstract: Assessment of visual acuity is a well standardized procedure at least for expert opinions and clinical trials. It is often recommended not giving patients feedback on the correctness of their responses. As this viewpoint has not been quantitatively examined so far, we quantitatively assessed possible effects of feedback on visual acuity testing. In 40 normal participants we presented Landolt Cs in 8 orientations using the automated Freiburg Acuity Test (FrACT, <michaelbach.de/fract. Over a run comprising 24 trials, the acuity threshold was measured with an adaptive staircase procedure. In an ABCDDCBA scheme, trial-by-trial feedback was provided in 2 x 4 conditions: (A) no feedback, (B) acoustic signals indicating correctness, (C)visual indication of correct orientation, and (D) a combination of (B) and (C). After each run the participants judged comfort. Main outcome measures were absolute visual acuity (logMAR), its test-retest agreement (limits of agreement) and participants' comfort estimates on a 5-step symmetric Likert scale. Feedback influenced acuity outcome significantly (p = 0.02), but with a tiny effect size: 0.02 logMAR poorer acuity for (D) compared to (A), even weaker effects for (B) and (C). Test-retest agreement was high (limits of agreement: ± 1.0 lines) and did not depend on feedback (p>0.5). The comfort ranking clearly differed, by 2 steps on the Likert scale: the condition (A)-no feedback-was on average "slightly uncomfortable", the other three conditions were "slightly comfortable" (p<0.0001). Feedback affected neither reproducibility nor the acuity outcome to any relevant extent. The participants, however, reported markedly greater comfort with any kind of feedback. We conclude that systematic feedback (as implemented in FrACT) offers nothing but advantages for routine use.
authors.affiliation: Section Visual Function / Electrophysiology Eye Center, Freiburg University Medical Center, Killianstr 5, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Bach
authors.affiliation: Section Visual Function / Electrophysiology Eye Center, Freiburg University Medical Center, Killianstr 5, 79106, Freiburg, Germany.
authors.forename: Kerstin
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Schäfer
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D030141:Feedback, Psychological; D005260:Female; D006240:Happiness; D006801:Humans; D007721:Knowledge of Results, Psychological; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D014787:Vision Tests / Q000523:psychology*; D014792:Visual Acuity / Q000502:physiology*
references.citation: Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1976 Nov;53(11):740-5
references.pmid: 998716
references.citation: Science. 1992 May 15;256(5059):1018-21
references.pmid: 1589770
references.citation: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993 Jan;34(1):120-9
references.pmid: 8425819
references.citation: Vision Res. 1993 Feb;33(3):397-412
references.pmid: 8447110
references.citation: Nature. 1993 Sep 16;365(6443):250-2
references.pmid: 8371779
references.citation: Optom Vis Sci. 1996 Jan;73(1):49-53
references.pmid: 8867682
references.citation: Vision Res. 2015 Sep;114:161-72
references.pmid: 25676883
references.citation: Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):135-60
references.pmid: 10501650
references.citation: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2007 Jul;245(7):965-71
references.pmid: 17219125
references.citation: Nat Rev Neurosci. 2010 Jan;11(1):53-60
references.pmid: 19953104
references.citation: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2011 Sep;249(9):1319-26
references.pmid: 21509531
references.citation: Vision Res. 2014 Jun;99:99-110
references.pmid: 24325851
references.citation: Vision Res. 1997 Aug;37(15):2133-41
references.pmid: 9327060