Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Neurol.
Sec. Neuro-Ophthalmology
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1533382

Near vision assessment for adults using the NIH Toolbox

Provisionally accepted
John-Christopher Finley John-Christopher Finley 1*Jerry Slotkin Jerry Slotkin 2Cindy Nowinski Cindy Nowinski 3,4Katy Bedjeti Katy Bedjeti 3Nicholas Volpe Nicholas Volpe 5Sandra Weintraub Sandra Weintraub 1,6Richard Gershon Richard Gershon 7
  • 1 Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • 2 Center for Health Assessment Research and Translation, University of Delaware, Newark, United States
  • 3 Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • 4 The Ken & Ruth Davee Department of Neurology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • 5 Department of Ophthalmology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • 6 Mesulam Center for Cognitive Neurology and Alzheimer’s Disease, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, United States
  • 7 Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, United States

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Toolbox Near Visual Acuity Test is a novel digitized measure designed to provide an assessment of near vision in a time- and cost-effective manner. This study is the first to report the psychometric properties of the NIH Toolbox Near Visual Acuity Test in a sample of community-dwelling middle-aged and older adults. Ninety-eight adults (ages 40-81) completed the tablet-based near vision test and the gold standard chart-based near vision test. Performance on the tablet- and chart-based near vision tests was expressed in logarithmic units. Chart- and tablet-based administration order was counterbalanced. To assess test-retest reliability, the NIH Toolbox Near Visual Acuity Test was administered twice within the same day. Additionally, two equivalent versions of the chart-based test were randomly assigned to participants. Analyses revealed that test-retest reliability of the NIH Toolbox Near Visual Acuity Test was good (intraclass correlation = .87, p < .001). Concurrence between the NIH Toolbox Near Visual Acuity Test and gold standard chart-based test was also good (r = .79, p < .001). Findings provide support for the reliability and validity of the NIH Toolbox Near Visual Acuity Test as a near vision assessment for middle-aged to older adult populations. With further research, the integration of this test within the widely used NIH Toolbox may provide a more efficient means to understanding how near visual acuity influences neurocognitive test performance and brain function in middle-aged to older adult populations.

    Keywords: Near vision, Visual Acuity, NIH Toolbox, cognitive, Neurology, Neuropsychology

    Received: 23 Nov 2024; Accepted: 06 Jan 2025.

    Copyright: © 2025 Finley, Slotkin, Nowinski, Bedjeti, Volpe, Weintraub and Gershon. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: John-Christopher Finley, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, 60611, Illinois, United States

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.