the popularity of the iPad for visually-impaired individuals, including seniors. Times New ... Shelton Regismarianayagam. Times New Roman, 18 points, Text 2.
Comparison of reading speed in persons with low vision using CCTV and iPad Aaron Johnson,
Shannon K. Riley, M.A.
PhD
Department of Psychology, Concordia University Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire en réadaptation du Montréal métropolitain
School of Optometry, Université de Montréal Envision Research Institute, Wichita, Kansas
Olga Overbury, PhD
Walter Wittich, PhD, FAAO, CLVT
School of Optometry, Université de Montréal Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire en réadaptation
School of Optometry, Université de Montréal MAB-Mackay Rehabilitation Centre, Montreal, Canada Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire en réadaptation
du Montréal métropolitain
du Montréal métropolitain Department of Psychology, Concordia University
Times New Roman, 12 points, Text 1
Times New Roman, 18 points, Text 2
INTRODUCTION
Times New Roman, 24 points, Text 3
METHOD
Since 2010, scientific papers and news reports have mentioned the popularity of the iPad for visually-impaired individuals, including seniors. The iPad’s characteristics make it an appealing choice for lowvision reading: a large screen, programmable font size, and the option to switch from black-on-white to white-on-black lettering. Roth et al. (2012) tested 62 participants with low vision and had them read different New York Times articles in either newspaper form, a printed webpage, or on the iPad. Among all participants, no significant preference was expressed regarding reading medium, but reading speed was significantly higher using the iPad 2. Further, individuals read faster in 18 vs 12point font. Gill et al. (2013) tested 27 patients with Age-Related Macular Degeneration, and found that patients consistently read faster with the iPad in comparison to either paper or Sony eReader. Haji et al. (2015) tested 228 participants found that only 22% of participants could read newsprint-sized text without the help of an iPad, compared to 94% whom could read with the iPad. The problem with these studies are: increase in reading rate could simply be due to magnification; no standardized texts are used; the participants’ language and reading skills are never assessed; fixed values of magnification are used (12 or 18 point font); reading comprehension was never tested. Our aim with this study is to significantly improve the methodology, and rigorously test how effective iPad reading is for individuals with visual impairment, in comparison to other magnification devices. Here we present our preliminary findings. Times New Roman, 64 points, Text 4
CONCLUSION
RESULTS
Participants: Clients of the MAB-Mackay Rehabilitation Centre were recruited over the phone in two waves. First, clients seen in the last two years in the Visual Impairment Program for Seniors (65+) with age-related macular degeneration. Second, any client aged 18+ with a disease affecting visual acuity. Cognitive Assessment: Montreal Cognitive Assessment for the Blind or MoCA Blind (Wittich et al., 2010) Education Questions: Participants were asked the highest level of education they had completed. Reading Habits: Self-reported proficiency in reading, reading habits pre- and post-onset of low vision (e.g., frequency, enjoyment, type of texts read), and experience with iPad and CCTV.
(
)(
)
55 females 78 English-speaking 36 males n = 93 15 French-speaking 1 other Acuity (Distance) = 0.82 LogMAR (0.76 – 0.87); 20/132 (20/115 – 20/148)
54
Macular degeneration
(50 dry AMD, 2 wet AMD, 2 Stargardt’s)
30
Pass (≥ 18) = 65 / 93 (69.89%)
38
20
High school or less
83%
Short texts
Before the onset of your visual impairment, how often did you read the newspaper, books or online?
Current Use:
27%
CCTV
Do you enjoy reading now?
Skill:
56%
Have used a CCTV
Visual Function: Visual 14 Questionnaire (Steinberg et al., 1994). Questions 1-3 ask about difficulty in reading small, medium, or large text.
33%
30%
31%
Pleasure
9%
Hand-held Magnifier
22%
white paper, times new roman, 12 point
Participants could change the settings on each device Read at any distance
iPad Air 2013
Clearview Optolec
Home
Magnification via optical devices
Distance / Text Size measured (nearest mm)
Roth, D. et al. (2012). Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Gill, K., Mao, A., Powell, A. M., & Sheidow, T. (2013). Digital reader vs print media: the role of digital technology in reading accuracy in age-related macular degeneration. Eye, 27(5), 639-643. Haji, S. A., Sambhav, K., Grover, S., & Chalam, K. V. (2015). Evaluation of the iPad as a low vision aid for improving reading ability. Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, NZ), 9, 17. Wittich, W., Phillips, N., Nasreddine, Z. S., & Chertkow, H. (2010). Sensitivity and specificity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment modified for individuals who are visually impaired. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, (104), 360-368. Steinberg, E. P., Tielsch, J. M., Schein, O. D., Javitt, J. C., Sharkey, P., Cassard, S. D. & Sommer, A. (1994). The VF-14: an index of functional impairment in patients with cataract. Archives of Ophthalmology, 112(5), 630-638.
Note: All error bars are 95% confidence intervals around the mean
Graduate
Enjoy reading after onset of low vision
23%
Have used iPad
Small Text MediumText Large Text
Raw Reading Rates Baseline Text
Glaucoma
3% Spiritual
Newspaper
Reading Tests:
The authors wish the acknowledge the hard work of the following lab members: Elliott Morrice, Christina Nadon, Julie-Andrée Marinier, Jessica Wilson, Jonathan Jarry, Alexandre Beaulieu, Kar-Mei Alice Quach, and Shelton Regismarianayagam.
Funding provided by:
14
Undergraduate
Do you have any difficulty, even with glasses, writing checks or filling out forms?
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Conflict of interest: No connections or conflicts to declare
20
College
Enjoyed reading before onset of low vision
Example question (medium text – question 1):
All three types of magnification improve reading rates to the same degree. The iPad fared no better nor worse than the CCTV or home choice magnification.
4
Not Yet Known
Fail (≤ 17) = 28 / 93 (30.11%)
49%
What is your preferred reading technique now?
5
Other
MoCA score average = 18.7 / 22 (95% confidence interval = 18.05 – 19.36)
Daily Reading Habits:
Example questions:
Age:
Reading Rates (Normalized)
iPad
