Assessing Agreement Between Acuvera Capture and Paper-Based Methods for BCVA Data Recording in Ophthalmic Trials (VALiCAPTURE)
An Observational Comparative Study Assessing Agreement Between Acuvera Capture and Paper-Based Methods for Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) Data Recording in Ophthalmic Clinical Trials
調査の概要
状態
条件
詳細な説明
Background and Rationale: Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) is the most widely accepted and clinically meaningful functional endpoint in ophthalmic clinical trials. It is routinely used to assess treatment efficacy, disease progression, and visual function across a broad spectrum of ocular diseases, including age-related macular degeneration (AMD), diabetic retinopathy, and inherited retinal diseases. Regulatory authorities such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) recognize BCVA as a primary endpoint in pivotal trials, and therapeutic approvals often hinge on statistically and clinically significant changes in BCVA outcomes (1-3).
Despite this critical role, BCVA data collection in clinical trials remains vulnerable when recorded on traditional paper forms. Common challenges include:
Calculation errors: Manual determination of the total number of letters correctly identified during BCVA testing is prone to human error, particularly when partial lines are read or when examiners must manually apply line-by-line scoring rules. Miscounting or incorrect summation of letter scores can result in inaccurate BCVA values and distort subsequent data analyses. These errors are inherent to paper-based recording processes and highlight the need for standardized, automated systems capable of performing real-time calculations to ensure data accuracy and consistency across study sites (1,2,3).
Transcription Errors: Manual transfer of BCVA scores from testing charts to case report forms can result in numerical misentries and calculation mistakes (4).
Omission and Misrecording: Missed data points, illegible handwriting, or recording the wrong line/letter score can compromise data integrity (5).
Protocol Deviations: Variations in testing procedures (e.g., incorrect testing distance, inappropriate prompting, or examiner bias) are not always detected in real time, introducing variability and bias (6).
Delayed Error Detection: Errors are often identified only retrospectively, during central reading or data monitoring, causing delays in data cleaning, increased trial costs, and, in some cases, regulatory queries (7).
Digital capture solutions such as Acuvera Capture address these limitations by embedding real-time quality control at the point of care. The application incorporates automated error detection, warning systems for protocol deviations, and standardized workflow guidance, ensuring higher data fidelity. By minimizing calculation, transcription and protocol errors, Acuvera Capture has the potential to strengthen data reliability, streamline trial conduct, and increase regulatory confidence in BCVA endpoints.
Given that BCVA is the most critical functional endpoint in ophthalmic clinical trials, even small improvements in accuracy and reproducibility can substantially impact study outcomes, regulatory acceptability, and sponsor credibility. This study will directly compare Acuvera Capture against paper-based recording to validate data agreement and assess error rates, efficiency, and usability, thereby generating essential evidence to support digital transformation of BCVA data collection.
研究の種類
入学 (推定)
連絡先と場所
研究連絡先
- 名前:Tânia Mesquita, BSc
- 電話番号:+351 239484348
- メール:emc.trials@oftalmologia.co.pt
研究連絡先のバックアップ
- 名前:Ana Claudia Rocha, BSc
- メール:abr@ess.ipp.pt
研究場所
-
-
-
Coimbra、ポルトガル、3030-015
- 募集
- Espaco Medico de Coimbra
-
コンタクト:
- Tânia Mesquita, BSc
- 電話番号:+351 239484348
- メール:emc.trials@oftalmologia.co.pt
-
主任研究者:
- Rufino Silva, PhD
-
Porto、ポルトガル、4200-072
- 募集
- TBIO - Escola Superior de Saúde do Politécnico do Porto
-
コンタクト:
- Ana Claudia Rocha, BSc
- 電話番号:+351 22 206 1000
- メール:abr@ess.ipp.pt
-
主任研究者:
- Catarina Mateus, PhD
-
-
参加基準
適格基準
就学可能な年齢
- 大人
- 高齢者
健康ボランティアの受け入れ
サンプリング方法
調査対象母集団
説明
90 adult participants (≈180 eyes) with the following BCVA levels, will be included:
- 30 participants (33%) in the normal/near-normal BCVA range (≤0.3 logMAR ≥70 letters); ≈20/40 or better);
- 30 participants (33%) with mid-range BCVA (0.4-0.9 logMAR (36-69 letters); 20/50 to 20/200)
- 30 participants (33%) with low vision BCVA (≥ 1.0 logMAR (≤35 letters); worse than 20/200) including off-chart acuities using protocol low-vision procedures).
Inclusion Criteria:
- Adults ≥18 years old
- Able and willing to provide written informed consent
- Capable of performing BCVA testing procedures according to study requirements
- All BCVA ranges are eligible, including off-chart acuities (e.g., count fingers, hand motion, light perception) irrespective of the presence or absence of ocular disease.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Any condition preventing reliable completion of BCVA testing (e.g., severe cognitive impairment, language barriers)
- Inability or unwillingness to comply with study requirements
- Non-ophthalmic condition that precludes safe or reliable testing (e.g., immediate post-operative systemic status preventing cooperation).
- Any circumstance that, in the investigator's opinion, makes the eye/participant unsuitable for accurate BCVA testing or for completing both data-capture methods during the same visit.
Number of Sites: 2 ophthalmic clinical research centers Portugal)
Number of Countries: Portugal
Number of Visits: One study visit per participant
Duration: 2 months
Participants will undergo BCVA testing at a single visit using both paper-based recording and electronic capture with Acuvera Capture. Testing order will be randomized to minimize bias. Paper data will be inserted by the examiners or study coordinator into the study eCRF. Electronic capture data will be exported directly from the app.
研究計画
研究はどのように設計されていますか?
デザインの詳細
コホートと介入
グループ/コホート |
|---|
|
Normal/Near Normal BCVA Range
30 participants (33%) in the normal/near-normal BCVA range (≤0.3 logMAR ≥70 letters); ≈20/40 or better);
|
|
Mid-range BCVA
30 participants (33%) with mid-range BCVA (0.4-0.9 logMAR (36-69 letters); 20/50 to 20/200)
|
|
Low Vision BCVA
30 participants (33%) with low vision BCVA (≥ 1.0 logMAR (≤35 letters); worse than 20/200) including off-chart acuities using protocol low-vision procedures).
|
この研究は何を測定していますか?
主要な結果の測定
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
|---|---|---|
|
Level of agreement in BCVA data recording between Acuvera Capture and paper-based methods
時間枠:Difference of BCVA score results between paper and Acuvera Capture, in the same single visit - Baseline. (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
Level of agreement in BCVA data recording between Acuvera Capture and paper-based methods, expressed using the statistical measurement of concordance, intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]
|
Difference of BCVA score results between paper and Acuvera Capture, in the same single visit - Baseline. (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
二次結果の測定
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
|---|---|---|
|
Data discrepancies and errors
時間枠:Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
Frequency and types of discrepancies between paper and electronic capture (e.g., calculation or transcription errors, missing data, protocol deviations). Error rates stratified by category (e.g., digit transposition, incomplete fields, illegible entries). |
Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
|
Efficiency metrics
時間枠:Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
Time to complete BCVA data entry (per assessment and per session). Time to query resolution (if applicable). Overall workflow efficiency (average time saved per visit). |
Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
|
User feedback
時間枠:Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
A survey (Acuvera Capture Experience Survey) is going to be sent to the examiners, that will answer 7 questions about the experience of using Acuvera Capture. The Survey uses a scale of 1-5 (one being the worst and 5 being the best). Usability ratings from certified examiners (measured through structured questionnaires or Likert scales) Questions 1 to 3 of the Acuvera Capture Survey. Qualitative feedback on workflow integration, ease of use, and error prevention features. Question 3 and 4 of the Acuvera Capture Survey. Examiner preference between electronic vs. paper methods. - Questions 5 to 7 of the Acuvera Capture Survey. |
Baseline (Same visit; assessments performed sequentially within minutes).
|
協力者と研究者
スポンサー
捜査官
- スタディディレクター:Ana Rita Santos, PhD、OptymEdge, LLC
出版物と役立つリンク
一般刊行物
- Cole ED, Ferrara D, Novais EA, Louzada RN, Waheed NK. CLINICAL TRIAL ENDPOINTS FOR OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY ANGIOGRAPHY IN NEOVASCULAR AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION. Retina. 2016 Dec;36 Suppl 1:S83-S92. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000001338.
- Rosser DA, Laidlaw DA, Murdoch IE. The development of a "reduced logMAR" visual acuity chart for use in routine clinical practice. Br J Ophthalmol. 2001 Apr;85(4):432-6. doi: 10.1136/bjo.85.4.432.
- Schulz C, et al. Sources of variability in visual acuity measurement and implications for clinical trials. Br J Ophthalmol. 2016;100(1):62-68.
- Ehlers JP, et al. Errors in visual acuity data recording in ophthalmic clinical trials: impact and mitigation strategies. Ophthalmology. 2020;127(6):747-754.
- Kaiser PK. Prospective evaluation of visual acuity assessment: a comparison of snellen versus ETDRS charts in clinical practice (An AOS Thesis). Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc. 2009 Dec;107:311-24.
- Csaky KG, Richman EA, Ferris FL 3rd. Report from the NEI/FDA Ophthalmic Clinical Trial Design and Endpoints Symposium. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008 Feb;49(2):479-89. doi: 10.1167/iovs.07-1132. No abstract available.
- European Medicines Agency (EMA). Guideline on Clinical Investigation of Medicinal Products in the Treatment of Chronic Primary Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension. EMA/CHMP; 2012.
- U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Guidance for Industry: Ophthalmic Drug Products - Clinical Pharmacology Considerations. Silver Spring, MD: FDA; 2015.
- Beck RW, Moke PS, Turpin AH, Ferris FL 3rd, SanGiovanni JP, Johnson CA, Birch EE, Chandler DL, Cox TA, Blair RC, Kraker RT. A computerized method of visual acuity testing: adaptation of the early treatment of diabetic retinopathy study testing protocol. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003 Feb;135(2):194-205. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9394(02)01825-1.
研究記録日
主要日程の研究
研究開始 (実際)
一次修了 (推定)
研究の完了 (推定)
試験登録日
最初に提出
QC基準を満たした最初の提出物
最初の投稿 (実際)
学習記録の更新
投稿された最後の更新 (実際)
QC基準を満たした最後の更新が送信されました
最終確認日
詳しくは
本研究に関する用語
個々の参加者データ (IPD) の計画
個々の参加者データ (IPD) を共有する予定はありますか?
医薬品およびデバイス情報、研究文書
米国FDA規制医薬品の研究
米国FDA規制機器製品の研究
この情報は、Web サイト clinicaltrials.gov から変更なしで直接取得したものです。研究の詳細を変更、削除、または更新するリクエストがある場合は、register@clinicaltrials.gov。 までご連絡ください。 clinicaltrials.gov に変更が加えられるとすぐに、ウェブサイトでも自動的に更新されます。