Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1007/s10792-016-0281-9 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1007/s10792-016-0281-9 C5929099!5929099!27495950     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 209.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534       Int+Ophthalmol 2017 ; 37 (2): 433-9 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=27495950|t=2017. Visual consequences of electronic reader use: a pilot study |pdf=|usr=}}{{27495950}} gab.com Text Visual consequences of electronic reader use: a pilot study JO: Int Ophthalmol http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=27495950 #FOAvip Background: With the increasing prevalence of electronic readers (e-readers) for vocational and professional uses, it is important to discover if there are visual consequences in the use of these products. There are no studies in the literature quantifying the incidence or severity of eyestrain, nor are there clinical characteristics that may predispose to these symptoms with e-reader use. Purpose: The primary objective of this pilot study was to assess the degree of eyestrain associated with e-reader use compared to traditional paper format. The secondary outcomes of this study were to assess the rate of eyestrain associated with e-reader use and identify any clinical characteristics that may be associated with the development of eyestrain. Methods: Forty-four students were randomly assigned to study (e-reader iPAD) and control (print) groups. Participant posture, luminosity of the room, and reading distance from reading device were measured during a 1-h session for both groups. At the end of the session, questionnaires were administered to determine symptoms. Results: Significantly higher rates of eyestrain (p = 0.008) and irritation (p = 0.011) were found among the iPAD study group as compared to the print ?control? group. The study group was also 4.9 times more likely to report severe eyestrain (95 % CI [1.4, 16.9]). No clinical characteristics predisposing to eyestrain could be identified. Conclusions: These findings conclude that reading on e-readers may induce increased levels of irritation and eyestrain. Predisposing factors, etiology, and potential remedial interventions remain to be determined. Twit Text FOAVip Visual consequences of electronic reader use: a pilot study ????Int Ophthalmol http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=27495950 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=27495950 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|27495950}}</ref> Visual consequences of electronic reader use: a pilot study #MMPMID27495950 Maducdoc MM; Haider A; Nalbandian A; Youm JH; Morgan PV; Crow RW Int Ophthalmol 2017[Apr]; 37 (2): 433-9 PMID27495950show ga Background: With the increasing prevalence of electronic readers (e-readers) for vocational and professional uses, it is important to discover if there are visual consequences in the use of these products. There are no studies in the literature quantifying the incidence or severity of eyestrain, nor are there clinical characteristics that may predispose to these symptoms with e-reader use. Purpose: The primary objective of this pilot study was to assess the degree of eyestrain associated with e-reader use compared to traditional paper format. The secondary outcomes of this study were to assess the rate of eyestrain associated with e-reader use and identify any clinical characteristics that may be associated with the development of eyestrain. Methods: Forty-four students were randomly assigned to study (e-reader iPAD) and control (print) groups. Participant posture, luminosity of the room, and reading distance from reading device were measured during a 1-h session for both groups. At the end of the session, questionnaires were administered to determine symptoms. Results: Significantly higher rates of eyestrain (p = 0.008) and irritation (p = 0.011) were found among the iPAD study group as compared to the print ?control? group. The study group was also 4.9 times more likely to report severe eyestrain (95 % CI [1.4, 16.9]). No clinical characteristics predisposing to eyestrain could be identified. Conclusions: These findings conclude that reading on e-readers may induce increased levels of irritation and eyestrain. Predisposing factors, etiology, and potential remedial interventions remain to be determined. äVisual consequences of electronic reader use: a pilot study (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing