Comparison of visual acuity assessment using peekaboo vision application and LEA grating paddles in children with autism spectrum disorder.

Researchers tested two different ways to check eyesight in 62 children with autism who had above-average intelligence. They compared a tablet app called Peekaboo Vision with traditional testing paddles. The app and paddles gave different results and can't be used as replacements for each other. The app took a bit longer to use but showed potential as a good way to test vision in children with autism.

This retrospective study compared two visual acuity assessment methods in 62 children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) aged 2-14 years, all with above-average intelligence (IQ >86). The Peekaboo Vision Application (PVA) and LEA grating paddles produced significantly different results and cannot be used interchangeably. PVA showed better visual acuity scores (0.47 ± 0.41 logMAR) compared to LEA grating paddles (0.85 ± 0.38 logMAR), but required longer testing time (1.45 vs 0.87 minutes). Despite the differences, both methods showed potential for assessing vision in children with ASD, with PVA demonstrating particular promise as a digital assessment tool.

Clinicians should be aware that different visual assessment tools may yield varying results in autistic children and should not be used interchangeably. The Peekaboo Vision Application shows promise as a digital assessment option, though longer testing times should be considered when planning appointments for children with autism.

Retrospective design limits causal inferences. Sample restricted to children with above-average IQ, limiting generalizability to the broader autism population. No information provided about test-retest reliability, examiner blinding, or comparison with gold-standard vision assessment methods.

To compare the visual acuity assessment using the Peekaboo vision application (PVA) and LEA grating paddles in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Children with ASD with better than average intelligence quotient levels (IQ >86) were included in this retrospective analysis. A total of 62 patients with ASD were included, of whom 77.4% were males and 22.6% were females. The mean age of the children was 5.85 ± 2.86 years (range: 2 to 14 years).

The number of patients with Superior IQ was 16 (25.8%), and the number of patients with above-average IQ was 41 (66.1%). The mean visual acuity obtained using the PVA was 0.47 ± 0.41 logMAR (range: 0.6 to 2.09 logMAR), and the mean visual acuity obtained using the LEA grating paddle was 0.85 ± 0.38 logMAR (range: 0.04 to 1.9 logMAR) (P < 0.001). The mean testing time using the PVA was 1.45 ± 0.46 minutes, and the mean testing time using the LEA grating paddle was 0.87 ± 0.53 minutes (P < 0.001). The study findings suggested that LEA grating and PVA were not comparable and should not be used interchangeably.

However, PVA has the potential to be used for visual acuity assessment in children with ASD.