Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Run Charts01:12

Run Charts

310
Run charts serve as an essential instrument for visualizing the performance of various processes over time, enabling the identification of trends and patterns crucial for quality improvement. These charts map out a series of data points chronologically, offering insights into the stability and efficiency of a process. A run chart's creation involves plotting data points on a graph, with the time intervals on the horizontal axis and the specific measurements on the vertical axis. For...
310
The R Chart01:02

The R Chart

438
In statistical process control, control charts, particularly R charts, are instrumental in monitoring process variations and identifying non-random patterns that run charts might miss. R charts track the variability within process subgroups, which is crucial when standard deviation use is impractical or unknown process variations exist.
R charts are pivotal for pinpointing shifts in process variability. Stability is indicated when all data points remain within the defined upper and lower...
438
Pareto Chart00:52

Pareto Chart

7.9K
A Pareto chart is a bar graph or a combination of both line and bar graphs. The bar lengths represent the individual values or the frequency, while the lines represent the cumulative total values. In this chart, the longest bars are arranged on the left and the shortest bars on the right, which makes it easier to read and interpret the data. It can also be called a Pareto diagram or Pareto analysis.
The Pareto chart is named after the Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto, who described the Pareto...
7.9K
Interpreting R Charts01:22

Interpreting R Charts

372
R chart, or range chart, is a fundamental tool in statistical process control used to monitor the variability within a process. It complements the X-bar (x̄) chart by focusing on the range of the data, rather than individual values, providing a clear picture of the process dispersion over time.
An R chart plots the range of subsets of measurements collected from a process. Each point on the chart represents the range—defined as the difference between the maximum and minimum...
372
Interpreting Run Charts01:25

Interpreting Run Charts

4.1K
Run charts, essentially line graphs plotted over time, serve as fundamental yet effective tools for process analysis. They chronicle data sequentially, facilitating the identification of trends, shifts, or cyclical movements. This graphical representation is instrumental in determining whether a process is stable or exhibits signs of potential instability indicative of special cause variation. In the healthcare domain, run charts depict infection rates over time, enabling hospitals to monitor...
4.1K
The X̄ Chart00:58

The X̄ Chart

485
The  x̄ chart is a statistical tool for monitoring the means in a process.
The x̄ chart, often known as the individual control chart, is a crucial tool in statistical process control. It is designed to monitor process behavior and performance over time and is widely used in various industries to ensure that processes are operating at their optimum capacity and within specified limits.
A x̄ chart is constructed by plotting individual measurements of a quality...
485

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Spatial remapping improves reading with simulated central field loss.

Journal of vision·2026
Same author

Assessment of newly designed fonts for visual accessibility.

PloS one·2026
Same author

Screening Questions to Identify Low Vision and Acuity-Defined Legal Blindness.

Investigative ophthalmology & visual science·2026
Same author

VI-OCR: "Visually Impaired" optical character recognition pipeline for text accessibility assessment.

Scientific reports·2025
Same author

The Preferred Retinal Locus for Reading in Central Vision Loss.

Investigative ophthalmology & visual science·2025
Same author

Task-specific effects of looming audio: Influences on visual contrast and orientation sensitivity.

Perception·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 15, 2026

The Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test MSPT: An iPad-Based Disability Assessment Tool
11:35

The Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test MSPT: An iPad-Based Disability Assessment Tool

Published on: June 30, 2014

58.8K

Comparing performance on the MNREAD iPad application with the MNREAD acuity chart.

Aurélie Calabrèse1, Long To2, Yingchen He2

  • 1Aix-Marseille University, CNRS, LPC, Marseille, France.

Journal of Vision
|January 20, 2018
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

The MNREAD Acuity Chart and its iPad app show similar reading performance for low-vision individuals. For those with normal vision, the iPad app yielded slightly slower maximum reading speeds compared to the printed chart.

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: Assessment of Visual Acuity in Central Vision Loss Through Motion-Based Peripheral Vision Testing
06:25

Author Spotlight: Assessment of Visual Acuity in Central Vision Loss Through Motion-Based Peripheral Vision Testing

Published on: February 23, 2024

1.2K
The Optokinetic Response as a Quantitative Measure of Visual Acuity in Zebrafish
04:56

The Optokinetic Response as a Quantitative Measure of Visual Acuity in Zebrafish

Published on: October 9, 2013

21.1K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 15, 2026

The Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test MSPT: An iPad-Based Disability Assessment Tool
11:35

The Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test MSPT: An iPad-Based Disability Assessment Tool

Published on: June 30, 2014

58.8K
Author Spotlight: Assessment of Visual Acuity in Central Vision Loss Through Motion-Based Peripheral Vision Testing
06:25

Author Spotlight: Assessment of Visual Acuity in Central Vision Loss Through Motion-Based Peripheral Vision Testing

Published on: February 23, 2024

1.2K
The Optokinetic Response as a Quantitative Measure of Visual Acuity in Zebrafish
04:56

The Optokinetic Response as a Quantitative Measure of Visual Acuity in Zebrafish

Published on: October 9, 2013

21.1K

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology
  • Vision Science
  • Human-Computer Interaction

Background:

  • The MNREAD Acuity Chart is a standard for assessing reading performance.
  • Digital versions of vision tests are increasingly common, necessitating validation against established tools.
  • Understanding performance differences between print and digital formats is crucial for accurate visual assessment.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare reading performance using the standard MNREAD Acuity Chart and an iPad application (app) version.
  • To evaluate differences in key reading parameters between the print and digital formats for both normally sighted and low-vision participants.

Main Methods:

  • 165 normally sighted and 43 low-vision participants were tested.
  • Reading performance was measured using both the printed MNREAD chart and its iPad app equivalent.
  • Key metrics analyzed included Maximum Reading Speed, Critical Print Size, Reading Acuity, and Reading Accessibility Index.
  • Linear mixed-effects models were employed to compare test results.

Main Results:

  • For normally sighted individuals, Critical Print Size and Reading Acuity were similar between the chart and app. However, Maximum Reading Speed was significantly slower on the iPad app, with the difference increasing for faster readers.
  • For low-vision participants, Maximum Reading Speed, Reading Accessibility Index, and Critical Print Size were equivalent across both formats.
  • Reading Acuity was slightly better (smaller logMAR value) on the iPad app for the low-vision group, though the difference was minimal.

Conclusions:

  • Overall, the MNREAD parameters measured by the printed chart and the iPad app are highly comparable.
  • The observed differences in Maximum Reading Speed for normally sighted participants are likely attributable to methodological variations in timing reading trials.
  • The iPad app serves as a valid digital alternative for MNREAD testing, particularly for low-vision assessment.