{
  "abstract": "Purpose: Visual acuity (VA) testing has expanded from examiner-guided to examinee self-guided assessments, yet measurement variability may limit clinical utility. This meta-analysis investigated VA-test's intertest and test-retest accuracy and precision across different testing strategies. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus for VA validation studies published between 1 January 1983 to 02 December 2024. Eligible studies reported intertest or test-retest Bland-Altman mean bias and limits of agreement (LoA); objective VA assessments and correlation coefficient only studies were excluded. Testing strategies were classified by test site, optotype sampling methods, response input methods, and level of supervision. Accuracy outcomes were reported as mean biases. Precision outcomes were reported as intertest LoA half-width and test-retest coefficient of repeatability (CoR) for test-retest. Multilevel random-effects models accounted for multiple estimates per study. Risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-2. Results: Across 82 included studies (10,873 participants), pooled intertest and test-retest mean biases were both 0.01 logMAR. Intertest LoA half-width was 0.19 logMAR and test-retest CoR was 0.14 logMAR. Variability showed marginal difference by optotype sampling (adaptive: LoA half-width 0.20 logMAR, CoR 0.15 logMAR; fixed: 0.18, 0.13) or response input method (examiner: 0.19, 0.13; self-run: 0.19, 0.18). Only few studies reported results for test site and level of supervision, hence only intertest was compared (test site, clinic: LoA half-width 0.19 logMAR vs remote 0.27 logMAR and level of supervision, supervised: 0.19 logMAR vs unsupervised 0.26 logMAR). QUADAS-2 identified patient selection as the domain of greatest bias concern. Conclusion: Across testing strategies, VA assessments showed minimal systematic bias but substantial variability. Lack of precision is more notable in remote and unsupervised testing while no difference within optotype sampling and response-input methods. Future development should prioritize on improving precision of visual acuity tests with finer adaptive optotype resolution and remote/unsupervised testings through repeatability studies.",
  "abstract_shown": true,
  "affiliations": [
    "UC Irvine"
  ],
  "article_type": "PUBLISHAHEADOFPRINT",
  "arxiv": null,
  "author_total": 3,
  "authors": [
    {
      "affs": [
        0
      ],
      "name": "C. Chen"
    },
    {
      "name": "A. W. Browne"
    },
    {
      "name": "J. Skerswetat"
    }
  ],
  "bibtex": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/eqyz79d8wkh64.bib",
  "cited_by": 0,
  "doi": "10.64898/2026.11.04.26366580",
  "fulltext_url": "https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.11.04.26366580v1.full",
  "id": "eqyz79d8wkh64",
  "issns": [],
  "landing_url": "https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.11.04.26366580v1",
  "language": null,
  "licence": "CC-BY",
  "licence_label": "CC BY",
  "licence_source": "article",
  "licence_url": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/",
  "metadata_licence": null,
  "native_subjects": [
    [
      "medrxiv",
      "ophthalmology"
    ]
  ],
  "openalex": null,
  "pdf_url": "https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.11.04.26366580v1.full.pdf",
  "pmcid": null,
  "pmid": null,
  "published": "2026-11-04",
  "publisher": null,
  "ris": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/eqyz79d8wkh64.ris",
  "sources": [
    {
      "first_seen": "2026-11-05T00:20:42Z",
      "native_id": "10.64898/2026.11.04.26366580",
      "source": "medrxiv",
      "url": "https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.11.04.26366580v1"
    }
  ],
  "subjects": [
    {
      "field": "medicine",
      "origin": "medrxiv:ophthalmology",
      "subfield": "general"
    }
  ],
  "title": "Accuracy and precision of visual acuity tests: A systematic review and meta-analysis across testing strategies",
  "title_text": "Accuracy and precision of visual acuity tests: A systematic review and meta-analysis across testing strategies",
  "type": "preprint",
  "updated_at": "2026-11-06T00:20:58Z",
  "url": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/eqyz79d8wkh64",
  "venue": "medRxiv",
  "versions": []
}