TY - JOUR T1 - Mobile app reading speed test JF - British Journal of Ophthalmology JO - Br J Ophthalmol SP - 536 LP - 539 DO - 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2014-305818 VL - 99 IS - 4 AU - Alec Kingsnorth AU - James S Wolffsohn Y1 - 2015/04/01 UR - http://bjo.bmj.com/content/99/4/536.abstract N2 - Aim To validate the accuracy and repeatability of a mobile app reading speed test compared with the traditional paper version. Method Twenty-one subjects wearing their full refractive correction glasses read 14 sentences of decreasing print size between 1.0 and −0.1 logMAR, each consisting of 14 words (Radner reading speed test) at 40 cm with a paper-based chart and twice on iPad charts. Time duration was recorded with a stop watch for the paper chart and on the App itself for the mobile chart allowing critical print size (CPS) and optimal reading speed (ORS) to be derived objectively. Results The ORS was higher for the mobile app charts (194±29 wpm; 195±25 wpm) compared with the paper chart (166±20 wpm; F=57.000, p<0.001). The CPS was lower for the mobile app charts (0.17±0.20 logMAR; 0.18±0.17 logMAR) compared with the paper chart (0.25±0.17 logMAR; F=5.406, p=0.009). The mobile app test had a mean difference repeatability of 0.30±22.5 wpm, r=0.917 for ORS, and a CPS of 0.0±0.2 logMAR, r=0.769. Conclusions Repeatability of the app reading speed test is as good (ORS) or better (CPS) than previous studies on the paper test. While the results are not interchangeable with paper-based charts, mobile app tablet-based tests of reading speed are reliable and rapid to perform, with the potential to capture functional visual ability in research studies and clinical practice. ER -