Original article. Repeatability assessment of the New Numbers Contrast Sensitivity Chart

1. Woods RL, Wood JM. The role of contrast sensitivity charts and contrast letter charts in clinical practice. Clin Exp Optom. 1995; 78:43-57.10.1111/j.1444-0938.1995.tb00787.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

2. Rosenfield M, Logan N. Optometry: science, techniques and clinical management. Elsevier, China; 2009.Search in Google Scholar

3. Crossland MD, Culham LE, Rubin GS. Predicting reading fluency in patients with macular disease. Optom Vis Sci. 2005; 82:11-7.Search in Google Scholar

4. Whittaker SG, Lovie-Kitchin J. Visual requirements for reading. Optom Vis Sci. 1993; 70:54-65.10.1097/00006324-199301000-000108430009Search in Google Scholar

5. Marron JA, Bailey IL. Visual factors and orientationmobility performance. Am J Optom Physiol Opt. 1982; 59:413-26.10.1097/00006324-198205000-000097102800Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

6. Owsley C, Ball K, McGwin G, Jr., Sloane ME, Roenker DL, White MF, et al. Visual processing impairment and risk of motor vehicle crash among older adults. JAMA. 1998; 279:1083-8.10.1001/jama.279.14.10839546567Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

7. Bullimore MA, Bailey IL, Wacker RT. Face recognition in age-related maculopathy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1991; 32:2020-9.Search in Google Scholar

8. Haymes SA, Johnston AW, Heyes AD. Relationship between vision impairment and ability to perform activities of daily living. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2002; 22:79-91.10.1046/j.1475-1313.2002.00016.x12014491Search in Google Scholar

9. West SK, Rubin GS, Broman AT, Munoz B, Bandeen- Roche K, Turano K. How does visual impairment affect performance on tasks of everyday life? The SEE Project. Salisbury Eye Evaluation. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002; 120:774-80.10.1001/archopht.120.6.77412049583Search in Google Scholar

10. Elliott DB, Hurst MA. Simple clinical techniques to evaluate visual function in patients with early cataract. Optom Vis Sci. 1990; 67:822-5.10.1097/00006324-199011000-000062250890Search in Google Scholar

11. Rubin GS, Adamsons IA, Stark WJ. Comparison of acuity, contrast sensitivity, and disability glare before and after cataract surgery. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 56-61.10.1001/archopht.1993.010900100600278424725Search in Google Scholar

12. Hawkins AS, Szlyk JP, Ardickas Z, Alexander KR, Wilensky JT. Comparison of contrast sensitivity, visual acuity, and Humphrey visual field testing in patients with glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2003; 12:134-8.10.1097/00061198-200304000-00008Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

13. Ghaith AA, Daniel J, Stulting RD, Thompson KP, Lynn M. Contrast sensitivity and glare disability after radial keratotomy and photorefractive keratectomy. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998; 116:12-8.10.1001/archopht.116.1.129445203Search in Google Scholar

14. Stavrou EP, Wood JM. Letter contrast sensitivity changes in early diabetic retinopathy. Clin Exp Optom. 2003; 86:152-6.10.1111/j.1444-0938.2003.tb03097.xOpen DOISearch in Google Scholar

15. Trobe JD, Beck RW, Moke PS, Cleary PA. Contrast sensitivity and other vision tests in the optic neuritis treatment trial. Am J Ophthalmol. 1996; 121:547-53.10.1016/S0002-9394(14)75429-7Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

16. Owsley C. Contrast sensitivity. Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2003; 16:171-7.10.1016/S0896-1549(03)00003-8Search in Google Scholar

17. Arditi A. Improving the design of the letter contrast sensitivity test. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005; 46: 2225-9.10.1167/iovs.04-1198Search in Google Scholar

18. Dougherty BE, Flom RE, Bullimore MA. An evaluation of the Mars Letter Contrast Sensitivity Test. Optom Vis Sci. 2005; 82:970-5.10.1097/01.opx.0000187844.27025.eaSearch in Google Scholar

19. Haymes SA, Roberts KF, Cruess AF, Nicolela MT, LeBlanc RP, Ramsey MS, et al. The letter contrast sensitivity test: clinical evaluation of a new design. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006; 47:2739-45.10.1167/iovs.05-1419Search in Google Scholar

20. Elliott DB, Sanderson K, Conkey A. The reliability of the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity chart. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 1990; 10:21-4.10.1111/j.1475-1313.1990.tb01100.xSearch in Google Scholar

21. Mantyjarvi M, Laitinen T. Normal values for the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity test. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2001; 27:261-6.10.1016/S0886-3350(00)00562-9Search in Google Scholar

22. Pelli DG, Robson JG, Wilkins AJ. The design of a new letter chart for measuring contrast sensitivity chart. Clin Vision Sci. 1988; 2:187-99.Search in Google Scholar

23. Thayaparan K, Crossland MD, Rubin GS. Clinical assessment of two new contrast sensitivity charts. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007; 91:749-52.10.1136/bjo.2006.109280Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

24. Khambhiphant B, Tulvatana W, Busayarat M. The new numbers contrast sensitivity chart for contrast sensitivity measurement. J Optom. 2011; 4: 128-33.10.1016/S1888-4296(11)70054-1Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

25. Bland JM. How can I decide the sample size for a repeatability study? [cited 2014 Jun 16] Available from: http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~mb55/meas/ sizerep.htm.Search in Google Scholar

26. World Health Organization. The management of low vision in children: report of a WHO consultation, Bangkok, 23-24 July 1992. WHO: Geneva.Search in Google Scholar

27. The Mars Perceptrix Corporation. Mars log contrast sensitivity test scores and degree of loss. [cited 2014 Jun 16] Available from: http://www.marsperceptrix.com.Search in Google Scholar

28. Haymes SA, Chen J. Reliability and validity of the Melbourne Edge Test and High/Low Contrast Visual Acuity Chart. Optom Vision Sci. 2004; 81:308-16.10.1097/01.opx.0000134904.21274.db15181355Search in Google Scholar

29. Kiser AK, Mladenovich D, Eshraghi F, Bourdeau D, Dagnelie G. Reliability and consistency of visual acuity and contrast sensitivity measures in advanced eye disease. Optom Vision Sci. 2005; 82:946-54.10.1097/01.opx.0000187863.12609.7b16317369Search in Google Scholar