Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications
Identifieur interne : 001561 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001560; suivant : 001562Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications
Auteurs : Nathan Efron ; Philip B. Morgan ; Ritu JagpalSource :
- Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics [ 0275-5408 ] ; 2002-07.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
Abstract
An alternative to the use of printed grading scales for assessing the severity of contact lens‐induced ocular pathology is to use computer‐generated grading morphs. This technique involves manipulation of a continuously variable movie sequence until this matches the severity of the condition being observed. To validate the use of computer morphs, nine experienced optometrists were each invited to grade – to the nearest 0.1 increment – an image of each of 16 contact lens complications, using printed scales (Efron Grading Scales for Contact Lens Complications) and computer morphs (Efron Grading Morphs). This entire procedure was repeated approximately 2 weeks later, yielding a total data base comprising of 576 individual grading estimates. Good accuracy was achieved using computer morphs, as evidenced by the similarity between the mean of the test and retest grading estimates for the printed scales (2.8 ± 0.7) and the computer morphs (2.6 ± 0.8) (F1,8=2.7, p=0.14). There was no difference in median reliability between the printed scales (±0.41) and the computer morphs (±0.43) (Z=0.1, p=0.95). Computer morphs are thus considered to have been validated in view of their accuracy and reliability compared with printed scales. In addition, computer morphs offer considerable utility in terms of computer‐based clinical record keeping, teaching and learning, and clinical research.
Url:
DOI: 10.1046/j.1475-1313.2002.00049.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5BLe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications</title><author><name sortKey="Efron, Nathan" sort="Efron, Nathan" uniqKey="Efron N" first="Nathan" last="Efron">Nathan Efron</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Morgan, Philip B" sort="Morgan, Philip B" uniqKey="Morgan P" first="Philip B." last="Morgan">Philip B. Morgan</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Jagpal, Ritu" sort="Jagpal, Ritu" uniqKey="Jagpal R" first="Ritu" last="Jagpal">Ritu Jagpal</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5B</idno><date when="2002" year="2002">2002</date><idno type="doi">10.1046/j.1475-1313.2002.00049.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5B/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001561</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001561</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications</title><author><name sortKey="Efron, Nathan" sort="Efron, Nathan" uniqKey="Efron N" first="Nathan" last="Efron">Nathan Efron</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Morgan, Philip B" sort="Morgan, Philip B" uniqKey="Morgan P" first="Philip B." last="Morgan">Philip B. Morgan</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Jagpal, Ritu" sort="Jagpal, Ritu" uniqKey="Jagpal R" first="Ritu" last="Jagpal">Ritu Jagpal</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics</title><idno type="ISSN">0275-5408</idno><idno type="eISSN">1475-1313</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2002-07">2002-07</date><biblScope unit="volume">22</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="341">341</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="349">349</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0275-5408</idno></series><idno type="istex">968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5B</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1046/j.1475-1313.2002.00049.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">OPO049</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0275-5408</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>accuracy</term><term>computer grading morphs</term><term>contact lens complications</term><term>grading tools</term><term>printed grading scales</term><term>reliability</term><term>validation</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">An alternative to the use of printed grading scales for assessing the severity of contact lens‐induced ocular pathology is to use computer‐generated grading morphs. This technique involves manipulation of a continuously variable movie sequence until this matches the severity of the condition being observed. To validate the use of computer morphs, nine experienced optometrists were each invited to grade – to the nearest 0.1 increment – an image of each of 16 contact lens complications, using printed scales (Efron Grading Scales for Contact Lens Complications) and computer morphs (Efron Grading Morphs). This entire procedure was repeated approximately 2 weeks later, yielding a total data base comprising of 576 individual grading estimates. Good accuracy was achieved using computer morphs, as evidenced by the similarity between the mean of the test and retest grading estimates for the printed scales (2.8 ± 0.7) and the computer morphs (2.6 ± 0.8) (F1,8=2.7, p=0.14). There was no difference in median reliability between the printed scales (±0.41) and the computer morphs (±0.43) (Z=0.1, p=0.95). Computer morphs are thus considered to have been validated in view of their accuracy and reliability compared with printed scales. In addition, computer morphs offer considerable utility in terms of computer‐based clinical record keeping, teaching and learning, and clinical research.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Nathan Efron</name><affiliations><json:string>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Philip B. Morgan</name><affiliations><json:string>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Ritu Jagpal</name><affiliations><json:string>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>accuracy</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>computer grading morphs</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>contact lens complications</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>grading tools</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>printed grading scales</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>reliability</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>validation</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>OPO049</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>An alternative to the use of printed grading scales for assessing the severity of contact lens‐induced ocular pathology is to use computer‐generated grading morphs. This technique involves manipulation of a continuously variable movie sequence until this matches the severity of the condition being observed. To validate the use of computer morphs, nine experienced optometrists were each invited to grade – to the nearest 0.1 increment – an image of each of 16 contact lens complications, using printed scales (Efron Grading Scales for Contact Lens Complications) and computer morphs (Efron Grading Morphs). This entire procedure was repeated approximately 2 weeks later, yielding a total data base comprising of 576 individual grading estimates. Good accuracy was achieved using computer morphs, as evidenced by the similarity between the mean of the test and retest grading estimates for the printed scales (2.8 ± 0.7) and the computer morphs (2.6 ± 0.8) (F1,8=2.7, p=0.14). There was no difference in median reliability between the printed scales (±0.41) and the computer morphs (±0.43) (Z=0.1, p=0.95). Computer morphs are thus considered to have been validated in view of their accuracy and reliability compared with printed scales. In addition, computer morphs offer considerable utility in terms of computer‐based clinical record keeping, teaching and learning, and clinical research.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>6.951</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>595 x 782 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractCharCount>1392</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>4515</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>28940</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>9</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>203</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications</title><refBibs><json:item><host><author></author><title>Addison, G. (1997) Computer Morphing of Contact Lens Complications. Creation and Assessment of a New Method of Grading Contact Lens Complications. BSc Dissertation. Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, UK.</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Andersen, J. S., Davies, I. P., Kruse, A., Løfstrom, T. and Ringmann, L. A. (1996) Handbook of Contact Lens Management. Vistakon, Jacksonville, FL, USA.</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Annunziato, T., Davidson, R. G., Christensen, M. T., Deloach, J., Pazandak, B. B., Thurburn, L., Gluck, D. and Lay, M. (circa 1992) Aatlas of Slit Lamp Findings and Contact Lens‐Related Anomalies. Southwest Independent Institutional Review Board, Fort Worth, TX, USA.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>I. L. Bailey</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. A. Bullimore</name></json:item><json:item><name>T. W. Raash</name></json:item><json:item><name>H. R. Taylor</name></json:item></author><host><volume>32</volume><pages><last>432</last><first>422</first></pages><author></author><title>Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.</title></host><title>Clinical grading and the effects of scaling</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Giant papillary conjunctivitis</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. M. Bland</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. G. Altman</name></json:item></author><host><volume>8476</volume><pages><last>310</last><first>307</first></pages><author></author><title>Lancet</title></host><title>Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. J. Bron</name></json:item></author><host><volume>11</volume><pages><last>602</last><first>583</first></pages><author></author><title>Eye</title></host><title>The Doyne Lecture. Reflections on the tears</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Buchner, A., Faul, F. and Erdfelder, E. (1997) G•Power: A priori, Post‐hoc, and Compromise Power Analyses for the Macintosh Version 2.1.2. (Computer program). University of Trier, Trier, Germany.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. A. Bullimore</name></json:item><json:item><name>I. L. Bailey</name></json:item></author><host><volume>70</volume><pages><last>885</last><first>880</first></pages><author></author><title>Optom. Vis. Sci.</title></host><title>Considerations in the subjective assessment of cataract</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T. Chong</name></json:item><json:item><name>T. Simpson</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. Fonn</name></json:item></author><host><volume>77</volume><pages><last>251</last><first>244</first></pages><author></author><title>Optom. Vis. Sci.</title></host><title>The repeatability of discrete and continuous anterior segment grading scales</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>CCLRU grading scales (Appendix D)</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. C. Courtney</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. M. Lee</name></json:item></author><host><volume>9</volume><pages><last>310</last><first>302</first></pages><author></author><title>Int. Contact Lens Clin.</title></host><title>Predicting ocular intolerance of a contact lens solution by use of a filter system enhancing fluorescein staining detection</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Safety evaluation of new soft lens materials</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. Dundas</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Walker</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. L. Woods</name></json:item></author><host><volume>21</volume><pages><last>35</last><first>30</first></pages><author></author><title>Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt.</title></host><title>Clinical grading of corneal staining of non‐contact lens wearers</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>N. Efron</name></json:item></author><host><volume>213</volume><pages><last>34</last><first>26</first></pages><author></author><title>Optician</title></host><title>Clinical application of grading scales for contact lens complications</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>N. Efron</name></json:item></author><host><volume>18</volume><pages><last>186</last><first>182</first></pages><author></author><title>Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt.</title></host><title>Grading scales for contact lens complications</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Efron, N. (1999) Efron Grading Scales for Contact Lens Complications, 1st edn. Appendix A. Contact Lens Complications. Butterworth‐Heinemann – Optician, Oxford, UK, pp. 171–179.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>N. Efron</name></json:item></author><host><volume>219</volume><pages><last>43</last><first>42</first></pages><author></author><title>Optician</title></host><title>Grading scales</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Efron grading scales for contact lens complications (millennium edition). Appendix K</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Contact Lens Complications CD</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Efron Grading Morphs</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>The Efron Grading Tutor</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>N. Efron</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. B. Morgan</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. S. Katsara</name></json:item></author><host><volume>21</volume><pages><last>29</last><first>17</first></pages><author></author><title>Ophthal. Physiol. Opt.</title></host><title>Validation of grading scales for contact lens complications</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P. Fieguth</name></json:item><json:item><name>T. Simpson</name></json:item></author><host><volume>43</volume><pages><last>347</last><first>340</first></pages><author></author><title>Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.</title></host><title>Automated measurement of bulbar redness</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results – part 1: general principles and definitions</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Koch, D. D., De Sanabria, M. C., Sanning, F. B. and Soper, J. W. (1984) Atlas of Illustrations. Adverse Effects of Contact Lens Wear. An Atlas for the Ophthalmic Practitioner. Slack, Thorofare, NJ, USA, pp. 41–57.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T. Løfstrom</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. S. Andersen</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Kruse</name></json:item></author><host><volume>24</volume><pages><last>215</last><first>210</first></pages><author></author><title>Contact Lens Assoc. Ophthalmol. J.</title></host><title>Tarsal abnormalities: a new grading system</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. MacKinven</name></json:item><json:item><name>C. L. McGuinness</name></json:item><json:item><name>E. Pascal</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. L. Woods</name></json:item></author><host><volume>78</volume><pages><last>18</last><first>13</first></pages><author></author><title>Optom. Vis. Sci.</title></host><title>Clinical grading of the upper palpebral conjunctiva of non‐contact lens wearers</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. B. Mandell</name></json:item></author><host><volume>58</volume><pages><last>201</last><first>198</first></pages><author></author><title>J. Am. Optom. Assoc.</title></host><title>Slit lamp classification system</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C. W. McMonnies</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Chapman‐Davies</name></json:item></author><host><volume>64</volume><pages><last>250</last><first>246</first></pages><author></author><title>Am. J. Optom. Physiol. Opt.</title></host><title>Assessment of conjunctival hyperaemia in contact lens wearers. Part I</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C. G. Owen</name></json:item><json:item><name>F. W. Fitzke</name></json:item><json:item><name>E. G. Woodward</name></json:item></author><host><volume>16</volume><pages><last>437</last><first>430</first></pages><author></author><title>Ophthal. Physiol. Opt.</title></host><title>A new computer assisted objective method for quantifying vascular changes of the bulbar conjunctivae</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>E. B. Papas</name></json:item></author><host><volume>41</volume><pages><last>691</last><first>687</first></pages><author></author><title>Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.</title></host><title>Key factors in the subjective and objective assessment of conjunctival erythema</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C. M. Schnider</name></json:item></author><host><volume>5</volume><pages><last>104</last><first>101</first></pages><author></author><title>Contact Lens Spectrum</title></host><title>Rigid gas‐permeable extended wear</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Quantitative slit lamp observations in contact lens practice</title></host></json:item></refBibs><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><volume>22</volume><publisherId><json:string>OPO</json:string></publisherId><pages><total>9</total><last>349</last><first>341</first></pages><issn><json:string>0275-5408</json:string></issn><issue>4</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1475-1313</json:string></eissn><title>Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics</title><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1475-1313</json:string></doi></host><categories><wos><json:string>science</json:string><json:string>ophthalmology</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>health sciences</json:string><json:string>clinical medicine</json:string><json:string>ophthalmology & optometry</json:string></scienceMetrix></categories><publicationDate>2002</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2002</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1046/j.1475-1313.2002.00049.x</json:string></doi><id>968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5B</id><score>0.033407714</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5B/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5B/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5B/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford UK</pubPlace><availability><p>WILEY</p></availability><date>2002</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Nathan</forename><surname>Efron</surname></persName><affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">Philip B.</forename><surname>Morgan</surname></persName><affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-3"><persName><forename type="first">Ritu</forename><surname>Jagpal</surname></persName><affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics</title><idno type="pISSN">0275-5408</idno><idno type="eISSN">1475-1313</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1475-1313</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2002-07"></date><biblScope unit="volume">22</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="341">341</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="349">349</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5B</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1046/j.1475-1313.2002.00049.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">OPO049</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2002</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>An alternative to the use of printed grading scales for assessing the severity of contact lens‐induced ocular pathology is to use computer‐generated grading morphs. This technique involves manipulation of a continuously variable movie sequence until this matches the severity of the condition being observed. To validate the use of computer morphs, nine experienced optometrists were each invited to grade – to the nearest 0.1 increment – an image of each of 16 contact lens complications, using printed scales (Efron Grading Scales for Contact Lens Complications) and computer morphs (Efron Grading Morphs). This entire procedure was repeated approximately 2 weeks later, yielding a total data base comprising of 576 individual grading estimates. Good accuracy was achieved using computer morphs, as evidenced by the similarity between the mean of the test and retest grading estimates for the printed scales (2.8 ± 0.7) and the computer morphs (2.6 ± 0.8) (F1,8=2.7, p=0.14). There was no difference in median reliability between the printed scales (±0.41) and the computer morphs (±0.43) (Z=0.1, p=0.95). Computer morphs are thus considered to have been validated in view of their accuracy and reliability compared with printed scales. In addition, computer morphs offer considerable utility in terms of computer‐based clinical record keeping, teaching and learning, and clinical research.</p></abstract><textClass xml:lang="en"><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>keywords</head><item><term>accuracy</term></item><item><term>computer grading morphs</term></item><item><term>contact lens complications</term></item><item><term>grading tools</term></item><item><term>printed grading scales</term></item><item><term>reliability</term></item><item><term>validation</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2002-07">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5B/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Science Ltd</publisherName><publisherLoc>Oxford UK</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1475-1313</doi><issn type="print">0275-5408</issn><issn type="electronic">1475-1313</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="OPO"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="OPHTHALMIC PHYSIOLOGICAL OPTICS">Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="07004"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/opo.2002.22.issue-4</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="22">22</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="4">4</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2002-07">July 2002</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="0034100" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1046/j.1475-1313.2002.00049.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="OPO049"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="9"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Original Articles</title></titleGroup><eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2002-06-25"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2002-06-25"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.2 mode:FullText source:FullText result:FullText" date="2010-03-15"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-02-06"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-11-03"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="341">341</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="349">349</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo>Professor Nathan Efron E‐mail address: <email>n.efron@umist.ac.uk</email></correspondenceTo><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:OPO.OPO049.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="0"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="0"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="34"></count><count type="linksPubMed" number="10"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="2"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications</title><title type="shortAuthors">N. Efron et al.</title><title type="short">Validation of grading morphs</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Nathan</givenNames><familyName>Efron</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Philip B. </givenNames><familyName>Morgan</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr3" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Ritu</givenNames><familyName>Jagpal</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1" countryCode="GB"><unparsedAffiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><keywordGroup xml:lang="en"><keyword xml:id="k1">accuracy</keyword><keyword xml:id="k2">computer grading morphs</keyword><keyword xml:id="k3">contact lens complications</keyword><keyword xml:id="k4">grading tools</keyword><keyword xml:id="k5">printed grading scales</keyword><keyword xml:id="k6">reliability</keyword><keyword xml:id="k7">validation</keyword></keywordGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p>An alternative to the use of printed grading scales for assessing the severity of contact lens‐induced ocular pathology is to use computer‐generated grading morphs. This technique involves manipulation of a continuously variable movie sequence until this matches the severity of the condition being observed. To validate the use of computer morphs, nine experienced optometrists were each invited to grade – to the nearest 0.1 increment – an image of each of 16 contact lens complications, using printed scales (Efron Grading Scales for Contact Lens Complications) and computer morphs (Efron Grading Morphs). This entire procedure was repeated approximately 2 weeks later, yielding a total data base comprising of 576 individual grading estimates. Good accuracy was achieved using computer morphs, as evidenced by the similarity between the mean of the test and retest grading estimates for the printed scales (2.8 ± 0.7) and the computer morphs (2.6 ± 0.8) (<i>F</i><sub>1,8</sub>=2.7, <i>p</i>=0.14). There was no difference in median reliability between the printed scales (±0.41) and the computer morphs (±0.43) (<i>Z</i>=0.1, <i>p</i>=0.95). Computer morphs are thus considered to have been validated in view of their accuracy and reliability compared with printed scales. In addition, computer morphs offer considerable utility in terms of computer‐based clinical record keeping, teaching and learning, and clinical research.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Validation of grading morphs</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Nathan</namePart><namePart type="family">Efron</namePart><affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Philip B.</namePart><namePart type="family">Morgan</namePart><affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Ritu</namePart><namePart type="family">Jagpal</namePart><affiliation>Eurolens Research, Department of Optometry and Neuroscience, UMIST, PO Box 88, Manchester M60 1QD, UK</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford UK</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2002-07</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2002</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType><extent unit="references">34</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">An alternative to the use of printed grading scales for assessing the severity of contact lens‐induced ocular pathology is to use computer‐generated grading morphs. This technique involves manipulation of a continuously variable movie sequence until this matches the severity of the condition being observed. To validate the use of computer morphs, nine experienced optometrists were each invited to grade – to the nearest 0.1 increment – an image of each of 16 contact lens complications, using printed scales (Efron Grading Scales for Contact Lens Complications) and computer morphs (Efron Grading Morphs). This entire procedure was repeated approximately 2 weeks later, yielding a total data base comprising of 576 individual grading estimates. Good accuracy was achieved using computer morphs, as evidenced by the similarity between the mean of the test and retest grading estimates for the printed scales (2.8 ± 0.7) and the computer morphs (2.6 ± 0.8) (F1,8=2.7, p=0.14). There was no difference in median reliability between the printed scales (±0.41) and the computer morphs (±0.43) (Z=0.1, p=0.95). Computer morphs are thus considered to have been validated in view of their accuracy and reliability compared with printed scales. In addition, computer morphs offer considerable utility in terms of computer‐based clinical record keeping, teaching and learning, and clinical research.</abstract><subject lang="en"><genre>keywords</genre><topic>accuracy</topic><topic>computer grading morphs</topic><topic>contact lens complications</topic><topic>grading tools</topic><topic>printed grading scales</topic><topic>reliability</topic><topic>validation</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0275-5408</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1475-1313</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1475-1313</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">OPO</identifier><part><date>2002</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>22</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>4</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>341</start><end>349</end><total>9</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5B</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1046/j.1475-1313.2002.00049.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">OPO049</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource>WILEY</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Blackwell Science Ltd</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Rhénanie/explor/UnivTrevesV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001561 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001561 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Rhénanie
|area= UnivTrevesV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:968E369764004100991D7D0112E153F9DE398B5B
|texte= Validation of computer morphs for grading contact lens complications
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |