Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, Vol 40, 858-864, Copyright © 1999 by Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology

ARTICLES AND REPORTS

Characteristics of discrepancies between self-reported visual function and measured reading speed. Salisbury Eye Evaluation Project Team

SM Friedman, B Munoz, GS Rubin, SK West, K Bandeen-Roche and LP Fried
Department of Medicine, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

PURPOSE: Visual impairment is a risk factor for morbidity in the elderly and is often screened for by self-report. This study evaluates whether there are subsets for whom there is a discrepancy between self- reported and measured function. METHODS: The prevalence of a discrepancy between self-reported difficulty reading a newspaper and measured reading speed was determined in 2520 community-based men and women, aged 65 to 84 years, and the discrepant group characterized by polychotomous regression. RESULTS: Of subjects who reported minimal difficulty reading a newspaper, 10.8% (227/2107) read newsprint-sized text (0.21 degrees) more slowly than 80 words/min, a level previously shown to be necessary for sustained reading. Poor visual acuity, presence of psychiatric symptoms, and less satisfaction with vision were associated with being in the group that read slowly and reported difficulty with reading. Better cognition, better visual acuity, more years of education, white race, and fewer psychiatric symptoms were associated with being in the group that read more quickly and reported minimal difficulty. When reading the text size at which subjects read their fastest, only 2.6% of those with minimal difficulty remained discrepant. These individuals were more likely to have less education, be male, be African American, and have poorer cognitive status than those who did not remain discrepant. CONCLUSIONS: A subset of the elderly population have a substantial discrepancy between self-reported reading difficulty and measured reading speed. In some, this discrepancy may be based on underlying expectations and experiences, and in others it may represent a transition from no visual impairment to visual impairment.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. A Stelmack, X. C. Tang, D. J. Reda, D. Moran, S. Rinne, R. M. Mancil, R. Cummings, G. Mancil, K. Stroupe, N. Ellis, et al. The Veterans Affairs Low Vision Intervention Trial (LOVIT): Design and Methodology Clinical Trials, December 1, 2007; 4(6): 650 - 660. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Subramanian and C. Dickinson Spatial Localization in Visual Impairment Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., January 1, 2006; 47(1): 78 - 85. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. K. West, B. Munoz, G. S. Rubin, K. Bandeen-Roche, A. T. Broman, and K. A. Turano Compensatory Strategy Use Identifies Risk of Incident Disability for the Visually Impaired Arch Ophthalmol, September 1, 2005; 123(9): 1242 - 1247. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L Tejeria, R A Harper, P H Artes, and C M Dickinson Face recognition in age related macular degeneration: perceived disability, measured disability, and performance with a bioptic device Br J Ophthalmol, September 1, 2002; 86(9): 1019 - 1026. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. K. West, G. S. Rubin, A. T. Broman, B. Munoz, K. Bandeen-Roche, K. Turano, and for the SEE Project Team How Does Visual Impairment Affect Performance on Tasks of Everyday Life?: The SEE Project Arch Ophthalmol, June 1, 2002; 120(6): 774 - 780. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. M. Weih, J. B. Hassell, and J. Keeffe Assessment of the Impact of Vision Impairment Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., April 1, 2002; 43(4): 927 - 935. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. A. Hazel, K. L. Petre, R. A. Armstrong, M. T. Benson, and N. A. Frost Visual Function and Subjective Quality of Life Compared in Subjects with Acquired Macular Disease Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., May 1, 2000; 41(6): 1309 - 1315. [Abstract] [Full Text]