ABSTRACT Eighty patient‐volunteers were refracted by the computer‐assisted Refractor III system and the results were compared with those obtained by the usual manual method. For the distance prescription 95% of the results were satisfactory. For the near add all were satisfactory. Relative validity of the system was also measured objectively by repeatability data. System test differences and test‐retest manual‐examination data were found comparable, indicating that the validity of the system is similar to that of the manual method. Further developments are expected to improve reliability, simplify maintenance, and extend testing so that the system will be an economical and useful instrument in eye clinics.
Marg et al. (Mon,) studied this question.