Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Concept Videos

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

11.1K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
11.1K
Fundamental Attribution Error01:14

Fundamental Attribution Error

13.8K
According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is...
13.8K
Random Error01:04

Random Error

9.9K
Random or indeterminate errors originate from various uncontrollable variables, such as variations in environmental conditions, instrument imperfections, or the inherent variability of the phenomena being measured. Usually, these errors cannot be predicted, estimated, or characterized because their direction and magnitude often vary in magnitude and direction even during consecutive measurements. As a result, they are difficult to eliminate. However, the aggregate effect of these errors can be...
9.9K
Margin of Error01:27

Margin of Error

7.7K
The margin of error is also called the maximum error of an estimate. The margin of error is the maximum possible or expected difference between the observed sample parameter value and the actual population parameter value. For proportion, it is the maximum difference between the value of sample proportion obtained from the data and the true value of population proportion. As the true value of the population parameter is not known, the margin of error is calculated using the sample statistic.
7.7K
Standard Error of the Mean01:13

Standard Error of the Mean

12.5K
The sampling variability of a statistic is defined as how much the statistic varies from one sample to another. The sampling variability of a statistic is typically measured by measuring its standard error.
The standard error of the mean is an example of a standard error. It is a unique standard deviation known as the standard deviation of the sampling distribution of the mean. The standard error of the mean is a statistic that calculates how correctly a sample distribution represents a...
12.5K
Contaminants and Errors01:16

Contaminants and Errors

392
Effective sample preparation is crucial for accurate and reliable laboratory analysis. During this process, two significant sources of error can arise: concentration bias from improper sample splitting and contamination caused by methods used to reduce particle size, such as grinding or homogenization. Identifying and minimizing these potential errors is crucial to ensuring the validity of the analysis.
Another key consideration is determining the appropriate number of samples required to...
392

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Assessment of an algorithm-based combination device for objective and subjective refraction: accuracy and efficiency across examiner experience levels.

Journal of optometry·2025
Same author

Exploring the impact of visual function degradation on manual prehension movements in normal-sighted individuals.

PloS one·2025
Same author

Neural contrast sensitivity is not affected by myopic blur.

Scientific reports·2025
Same author

Efficacy of Cylindrical Annular Refractive Elements (CARE) Spectacle Lenses in Slowing Myopia Progression Over 2 Years.

American journal of ophthalmology·2025
Same author

Using ATP measurements to rapidly evaluate the cleanliness of spectacle surfaces.

BMC research notes·2025
Same author

Chromatic imaging properties of myopia control spectacle lenses.

Biomedical optics express·2025
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 Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 15, 2026

A Simple Approach to Induce Experimental Autoimmune Neuritis in C57BL/6 Mice for Functional and Neuropathological Assessments
07:30

A Simple Approach to Induce Experimental Autoimmune Neuritis in C57BL/6 Mice for Functional and Neuropathological Assessments

Published on: November 9, 2017

10.1K

Self-assessment of refractive errors using a simple optical approach.

Alexander Leube1, Caroline Kraft1,2,3, Arne Ohlendorf1,2

  • 1Institute for Ophthalmic Research, Eberhard Karls University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.

Clinical & Experimental Optometry
|January 23, 2018
PubMed
Summary

This study shows adjustable Alvarez lenses can accurately measure refractive errors. Procedure 2, involving optotype rotation, yielded better visual acuity results than lens rotation.

Keywords:
Alvarez lensesrefractive errorsself-refractionvisual acuity

More Related Videos

Subjective Refraction Test Using a Smartphone for Vision Screening
05:36

Subjective Refraction Test Using a Smartphone for Vision Screening

Published on: October 18, 2024

1.8K
A Surgical Approach for Optic Nerve Crush in a Rabbit Model
06:15

A Surgical Approach for Optic Nerve Crush in a Rabbit Model

Published on: July 8, 2025

1.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 15, 2026

A Simple Approach to Induce Experimental Autoimmune Neuritis in C57BL/6 Mice for Functional and Neuropathological Assessments
07:30

A Simple Approach to Induce Experimental Autoimmune Neuritis in C57BL/6 Mice for Functional and Neuropathological Assessments

Published on: November 9, 2017

10.1K
Subjective Refraction Test Using a Smartphone for Vision Screening
05:36

Subjective Refraction Test Using a Smartphone for Vision Screening

Published on: October 18, 2024

1.8K
A Surgical Approach for Optic Nerve Crush in a Rabbit Model
06:15

A Surgical Approach for Optic Nerve Crush in a Rabbit Model

Published on: July 8, 2025

1.4K

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology
  • Optometry
  • Vision Science

Background:

  • Investigating novel methods for refractive error assessment.
  • Spherocylindrical refractive errors require precise measurement for effective correction.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To explore and evaluate procedures for self-assessment of spherocylindrical refractive errors using adjustable Alvarez lenses.
  • To compare the efficacy of two distinct self-refraction adjustment methods.

Main Methods:

  • Eighteen participants used adjustable Alvarez lenses in a rotatable holder.
  • Two procedures were tested: lens rotation and optotype rotation in three meridians.
  • Best-corrected visual acuity (BVA) and limits of agreement with standard refraction were analyzed.

Main Results:

  • Procedure 2 (optotype rotation) achieved better visual acuity (88%) compared to procedure 1 (77%).
  • Procedure 1 resulted in significantly worse BVA compared to subjective refraction.
  • ANOVA revealed a significant influence of method on oblique astigmatism (J45), but not spherical equivalent (M) or straight astigmatism (J0).

Conclusions:

  • Adjustable Alvarez lenses and rotatable stimuli offer a viable method for self-assessment of refractive errors.
  • Procedure 2 demonstrated higher accuracy and better visual outcomes in self-refraction.