東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back to Search results for [ null ]

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

The Use of Applications in Smartphon...

Al Hefzi, Aminah.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The Use of Applications in Smartphones vs. Portable Specific Electronic Devices to Compare the Reading Speed in Low Vision.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	The Use of Applications in Smartphones vs. Portable Specific Electronic Devices to Compare the Reading Speed in Low Vision./
Author:	Al Hefzi, Aminah.
Published:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2018,
Description:	135 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-07, Section: C.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International80-07C.
Subject:	Optometry. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=11015540
ISBN:	9781073982462

The Use of Applications in Smartphones vs. Portable Specific Electronic Devices to Compare the Reading Speed in Low Vision.
Al Hefzi, Aminah.

The Use of Applications in Smartphones vs. Portable Specific Electronic Devices to Compare the Reading Speed in Low Vision. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2018 - 135 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-07, Section: C.

Thesis (M.Phil.)--The University of Manchester (United Kingdom), 2018.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

Purpose: Difficulty in reading is one of the most common problems faced by visually impaired people (VIP). The clinician may recommend the use of specifically designed optical aids or electronic vision enhancement systems (EVES) to aid with this task. Whilst optical aids are available free of charge through the NHS, EVES can cost 200-2000. There are now free apps which can turn a standard smartphone into a portable EVES. This study investigated the reading speed achievable with the use of these apps in smart phones compared to specific portable devices for VIPs. Method: Reading performance was measured with two groups of normally sighted individuals (under age 35 and over age 60) with two different levels of simulated impairment (mild and moderate). The portable EVES device was used both hand-held and on a stand, and compared with two different free apps tested with a smart phone, one of which used image stabilisation. Performance was also measured with several different colour display choices available on the portable EVES (eg with black-on-white text converted to yellow-on-blue). A new reading test (150 random common words) was developed for this study and was tested for repeatability. Result: The coefficient of repeatability of reading test (CoR) was ± 14 wpm for the younger group and ± 9 wpm for the older group. The reading speed in "moderate impairment" was slower than "mild impairment" for both groups. The reading speed was significantly slower in the older group using all the different methods. Also, the older group read significantly slower than the young group with all colour displays in both mild and moderate impairment. The highest reading speed in mild impairment was by using a stand-mounted EVES for both groups, while in moderate impairment the highest reading speed was by using a hand-held EVES for the young group and a stand-mounted EVES for the older group. For the colours, the black-on-white had the highest reading speed for both levels of impairment for both groups. Conclusion: CoR was comparable to that of other reading tests, and the test may therefore prove to be useful when measuring the effect of interventions to improve vision. Also, it obvious that the highest reading speed can obtain by using p-EVES compared to apps in smartphones.

ISBN: 9781073982462Subjects--Topical Terms:

1362745
Optometry.

The Use of Applications in Smartphones vs. Portable Specific Electronic Devices to Compare the Reading Speed in Low Vision.
LDR:03415nmm a2200301 4500 001 2206510
005 20190828120152.5
008 201008s2018 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781073982462
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI11015540
035 $a (MiAaPQ)Manchester_UK41b496f6-7c72-4f98-8e51-197ade002386
035 $a AAI11015540
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Al Hefzi, Aminah. $3 3433418
245 1 4 $a The Use of Applications in Smartphones vs. Portable Specific Electronic Devices to Compare the Reading Speed in Low Vision.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2018
300 $a 135 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 80-07, Section: C.
500 $a Publisher info.: Dissertation/Thesis.
502 $a Thesis (M.Phil.)--The University of Manchester (United Kingdom), 2018.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a Purpose: Difficulty in reading is one of the most common problems faced by visually impaired people (VIP). The clinician may recommend the use of specifically designed optical aids or electronic vision enhancement systems (EVES) to aid with this task. Whilst optical aids are available free of charge through the NHS, EVES can cost 200-2000. There are now free apps which can turn a standard smartphone into a portable EVES. This study investigated the reading speed achievable with the use of these apps in smart phones compared to specific portable devices for VIPs. Method: Reading performance was measured with two groups of normally sighted individuals (under age 35 and over age 60) with two different levels of simulated impairment (mild and moderate). The portable EVES device was used both hand-held and on a stand, and compared with two different free apps tested with a smart phone, one of which used image stabilisation. Performance was also measured with several different colour display choices available on the portable EVES (eg with black-on-white text converted to yellow-on-blue). A new reading test (150 random common words) was developed for this study and was tested for repeatability. Result: The coefficient of repeatability of reading test (CoR) was ± 14 wpm for the younger group and ± 9 wpm for the older group. The reading speed in "moderate impairment" was slower than "mild impairment" for both groups. The reading speed was significantly slower in the older group using all the different methods. Also, the older group read significantly slower than the young group with all colour displays in both mild and moderate impairment. The highest reading speed in mild impairment was by using a stand-mounted EVES for both groups, while in moderate impairment the highest reading speed was by using a hand-held EVES for the young group and a stand-mounted EVES for the older group. For the colours, the black-on-white had the highest reading speed for both levels of impairment for both groups. Conclusion: CoR was comparable to that of other reading tests, and the test may therefore prove to be useful when measuring the effect of interventions to improve vision. Also, it obvious that the highest reading speed can obtain by using p-EVES compared to apps in smartphones.
590 $a School code: 1543.
650 4 $a Optometry. $3 1362745
690 $a 0210
710 2 $a The University of Manchester (United Kingdom). $3 3422292
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 80-07C.
790 $a 1543
791 $a M.Phil.
792 $a 2018
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=11015540