Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background Cerebral Visual Impairment (CVI) is the most common cause of low vision in children. Standardized, quantifiable measures of visual function are needed. Objective This study developed and evaluated a new method for quantifying visual function in young and medically complex children with CVI using remote videoconferencing. Methods Children diagnosed with CVI who had been unable to complete clinic-based recognition acuity tests were recruited from a low-vision rehabilitation clinic(n=22)Video-based Visual Function Assessment (VFA) was implemented using videoconference technology. Three low-vision rehabilitation clinicians independently scored recordings of each child’s VFA. Interclass correlations for inter-rater reliability was analyzed using intraclass correlations (ICC). Correlations were estimated between the video-based VFA scores and both clinically obtained acuity measures and children’s cognitive age equivalence. Results Inter-rater reliability was analyzed using intraclass correlations (ICC). Correlations were estimated between the VFA scores, clinically obtained acuity measures, and cognitive age equivalence. ICCs showed good agreement (ICC and 95% CI 0.835 (0.701-0.916)) on VFA scores across raters and agreement was comparable to that from previous, similar studies. VFA scores strongly correlated (r= -0.706, p=0.002) with clinically obtained acuity measures. VFA scores and the cognitive age equivalence were moderately correlated (r= 0.518, p=0.005), with notable variation in VFA scores for participants below a ten month cognitive age-equivalence. The variability in VFA scores among children with lowest cognitive age-equivalence may have been an artifact of the study’s scoring method, or may represent existent variability in visual function for children with the lowest cognitive age-equivalence. Conclusions Our new VFA is a reliable, quantitative measure of visual function for young and medically complex children with CVI. Future study of the VFA intrarater reliability and validity is warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Weden et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: