https://www.selleckchem.com/products/gsk3685032.html The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy and repeatability of refractive errors obtained using three autorefractors based on different measurement principles, vis-à-vis, gold-standard retinoscopy. Accuracy of noncycloplegic, sphero-cylindrical refractive error of 234 eyes was obtained using the rotary prism-based RM-8900 closed-field autorefractor, photorefraction based Spot vision screener, wavefront aberrometry based E-see, and streak retinoscopy by four different examiners, masked to the results of each other. Intersession repeatability of autorefractors was determined by repeat measurements in a subset of 40 subjects. Retinoscopy values of M, J , and J power vectors for the cohort ranged from -10.2 to 8 D, -1.4 to 1.8 D, and -0.9 to 1.2 D, respectively. Across autorefractors, the interequipment bias of M and J power vectors were statistically insignificant (< ±0.5 D; > 0.05) but the corresponding limits of agreement were ±2.5 and ±1 D, respectively, without any trend acrs caution while used for screening and quantification of refractive errors. To evaluate the performance of the quantitative visual acuity (qVA) method in measuring the visual acuity (VA) behavioral function. We evaluated qVA performance in terms of the accuracy, precision, and efficiency of the estimated VA threshold and range in Monte Carlo simulations and a psychophysical experiment. We also compared the estimated VA threshold from the qVA method with that from the Electronic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (E-ETDRS) and Freiburg Visual Acuity Text (FrACT) methods. Four repeated measures with all three methods were conducted in four Bangerter foil conditions in 14 eyes. In both simulations and psychophysical experiment, the qVA method quantified the full acuity behavioral function with two psychometric parameters (VA threshold and VA range) with virtually no bias and with high precision and efficiency. There was a si