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 Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 2, 2026

Binocular Dynamic Visual Acuity in Eyeglass-Corrected Myopic Patients
07:06

Binocular Dynamic Visual Acuity in Eyeglass-Corrected Myopic Patients

Published on: March 29, 2022

Optometrist-guided versus self-driven subjective refraction using tunable optics: quantifying the professional's

Raquel Salvador-Roger1, Abinaya Priya Venkataraman2, Vicente Micó1

  • 1Department of Optics and Optometry and Vision Sciences. University of Valencia. 46100 Burjassot, Spain.

Journal of Optometry
|March 2, 2026
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Influence of diffractive surface geometry on optical quality and halo formation in sinusoidal trifocal intraocular lenses.

Scientific reports·2026
Same author

Health-related quality of life and tobacco and alcohol consumption in Leber hereditary optic neuropathy in Sweden.

Frontiers in ophthalmology·2026
Same authorSame journal

Impact of peripheral optical errors in age-related macular degeneration.

Journal of optometry·2026
Same author

Asymmetry between nasal and temporal refraction with accommodation in myopes and emmetropes.

Biomedical optics express·2026
Same author

Spatial-shifting cepstrum: holography without a known reference beam.

Optics express·2025
Same author

Exploring the do-it-yourself approach in subjective refraction.

PloS one·2025
Same journal

Risk behaviors for infectious Keratitis among contact lens wearers in Switzerland: an analysis by contact lens type.

Journal of optometry·2026
Same journal

Validity of optical coherence tomography angiography in the differential diagnosis of papilledema and pseudopapilledema.

Journal of optometry·2026
Same journal

"OCT based retinal changes in amblyopia: A systematic review".

Journal of optometry·2026
Same journal

Comments on: Multifocal contact lenses and defocus incorporated multiple segments lenses slow myopic progression in Chinese children with high myopia.

Journal of optometry·2026
Same journal

Letter to the editor concerning "Multifocal contact lenses and defocus incorporated multiple segments lenses slow myopic progression in Chinese children with high myopia".

Journal of optometry·2026
See all related articles

The do-it-yourself (DIY) subjective refraction method using a tunable liquid lens (TLL) shows comparable accuracy and visual outcomes to professional guidance. This DIY approach offers a feasible, accessible option for remote or hybrid eye exams.

Area of Science:

  • Ophthalmology and Optometry
  • Optical Engineering
  • Human Factors Engineering

Background:

  • Subjective refraction is crucial for determining refractive error.
  • Novel optical systems, like tunable liquid lenses (TLL), offer potential for advanced refraction methods.
  • Evaluating participant-driven approaches is key to expanding access to eye care.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess the impact of professional guidance on a new subjective refraction technique using a TLL and Stokes lens.
  • To compare clinician-guided versus participant-driven refraction for accuracy, visual outcomes, and time.

Main Methods:

  • Sixty-six participants (18-44 years) underwent monocular subjective refraction using the same optical system.
  • Two conditions were tested: professional-guided (ORx) and do-it-yourself (DIY) by the participant.
Keywords:
Refractive errorSelf-refractionSubjective refractionTunable lens

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

Comparison of Agreement and Accuracy using Binocular Wavefront Optometer with Autorefractor and Phoropter
05:14

Comparison of Agreement and Accuracy using Binocular Wavefront Optometer with Autorefractor and Phoropter

Published on: September 16, 2025

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 2, 2026

Binocular Dynamic Visual Acuity in Eyeglass-Corrected Myopic Patients
07:06

Binocular Dynamic Visual Acuity in Eyeglass-Corrected Myopic Patients

Published on: March 29, 2022

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

Comparison of Agreement and Accuracy using Binocular Wavefront Optometer with Autorefractor and Phoropter
05:14

Comparison of Agreement and Accuracy using Binocular Wavefront Optometer with Autorefractor and Phoropter

Published on: September 16, 2025

  • Refractive components, visual acuity, and time were analyzed using statistical methods.

    • Main Results:

    • Both methods demonstrated strong agreement in refractive measurements.
    • A small systematic bias was noted, with slightly more positive spherical equivalents and longer times in the professional-guided group.
    • No statistically significant differences in accuracy or visual outcomes were found between the ORx and DIY methods.

    Conclusions:

    • Participant-driven subjective refraction with TLL technology is comparable to professional guidance.
    • The DIY method is a viable, accessible option for hybrid or remote refraction services.
    • Clinician supervision enhanced consistency, but the DIY approach proved feasible and effective.