New iPAD-based test for the detection of color vision deficiencies

  • Dolores de FezEmail author
  • María José Luque
  • Lucía Matea
  • David P. Piñero
  • Vicente J. Camps
Basic Science



To develop and validate a new iPad-based color vision test (Optopad).


A total of 341 student eyes were enrolled in a first comparative study between Optopad and the Isihara tests. In a second comparative study, Optopad vs. the Farnworth-Munsell test (FM 100H), a total of 66 adult eyes were included. Besides the agreement between tests, the correlation between FM 100H and Optopad outcomes were investigated. Multiple regression analysis was used to predict the total error score (TES) from contrast thresholds measured with the Optopad test.


The Ishihara and Optopad tests detected the same anomalous patients. Concerning FM 100H vs. Optopad, 10 subjects were diagnosed as anomalous with both tests, 3 mild anomalous cases based on TES were classified as normal with Optopad, and 2 anomalous subjects based on Optopad test showed normal TES values. Statistically significant correlations of TES and partial error red-green (PTESRG) with thresholds measured with the red-green Optopad stimuli were found. A multiple quadratic regression model was obtained relating TES and chromatic contrast values from Optopad (R2 = 0.855), with only 13 cases showing residuals of ≥ 25 units.


The design and implementation of a chromatic contrast discrimination test has been carried out, with promising clinical results. This test seems to provide comparable outcomes to those obtained with Ishihara and FM 100H tests.


iPad Chromatic discrimination Optopad Farnsworth-Munsell 100 hue test Ishihara plates 



The authors acknowledge the support of FUNCAVIS (Foundation for the Visual Quality, Alicante, Spain) for allowing participating in their lazy eye screening campaign in different schools by including the assessment of the color vision with the Optopad test.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material

417_2018_4154_MOESM1_ESM.docx (15 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 14 kb)


  1. 1.
    Black JM, Jacobs RJ, Phillips G, Chen L, Tan E, Tran A, Thompson B (2013) An assessment of the iPad as a testing platform for distance visual acuity in adults. BMJ Open 3(6)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kollbaum PS, Jansen ME, Kollbaum EJ, Bullimore MA (2014) Validation of an iPad test of letter contrast sensitivity. Optom Vis Sci 91:291–296PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Obradovic IV, Cappelli R, Priluck JC, Chalam KV, Grover S (2012) Comparison of color vision testing by standard Ishihara Color Plates versus iPad version. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 53:E-Abstract 6394Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    LC Nguyen, E Yi-Luen Do, A Chia, Y Wang, H Benn-Lird Duh (2014) DoDo Game, a color vision deficiency screening test for young children. Paper presented at the ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Toronto, 26 April-1 May 2014Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Fez D, Luque MJ, Garcia-Domene MC, Camps V, Piñero D (2016) Colorimetric characterization of mobile devices for vision applications. Optom Vis Sci 93:85–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garcia-Domene MC (2013) Design and testing of a campimeter of incremental threshold for projection. Dissertation. University of Alicante, Spain Accessed 22 March 2018
  7. 7.
    García-Domene MC, Luque MJ, de Fez MD (2015) Software [design of a campimeter of incremental threshold for projection]. Property registration 09 / 2015 / 447; University of Alicante, SpainGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stokes M, Fairchild MD, Berns RS (1992) Precision requirements for digital color reproduction. ACM Trans Graph 11:406–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Luo MR, Cui G, Rigg B (2001) The development of the CIE 2000 colour-difference formulaCIEDE2000. Color Res Appl 26:340–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Day EA, Taplin L, Berns RS (2004) Colorimetric characterization of a computer-controlled liquid crystal display. Color Res Appl 29:365Y73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Fez MD, Luque MJ, García-Domene MC, Caballero MT, Camps VJ (2018) Can applications designed to evaluate visual function be used in different iPads? Optom Vis SciGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Fez MD, Luque MJ (2017) Optopad software. Accessed 22 March 2018
  13. 13.
    Dain SJ (2004) Clinical colour vision test. Clin Exp Optom 87:276–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Birch J (1991) Colour vision tests: general classification. Vol 7 in Vision and visual dysfunction. General editor Cronly-Dillon JR, MacMillan Press, Boca Raton, FLGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kinnear PR, Sahraie A (2002) New Farnsworth-Munsell 100 hue test norms of normal observers for each year of age 5-22 and for age decades 30-70. Br J Ophthalmol 86:1408–1411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vingrys AJ, Atchison DA, Bowman KJ (1992) The use of colour difference vectors in diagnosing congenital colour vision deficiencies with the Farnsworth-Munsell 100-hue test. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 12:38–45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Smith VC, Pokorny J, Pass AS (1985) Color-axis determination on the Farnsworth-Munsell 100-hue test. Am J Ophthalmol 100:176–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mäntyjärvi M (2001) Normal test scores in the Farnsworth–Munsell 100 hue test. Doc Ophthalmol 102:73–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    García-Domene MC, Díez Ajenjo A, de Fez Saiz D, Luque Cobija MJ (2016) Base de datos normativa para las puntuaciones parciales rojo-verde y azul-amarillo del test Farnsworth-Munsell 100Hue. Paper presented at the XI Congreso Nacional de Color, Universidad de Vigo, Spain, 19–22 July 2016 Accessed 22 March 2018
  20. 20.
    Kitahara K, Kandatsu A (1985) Determining a standard for the FM 100-hue test in cases where there may or may not be a clear orientation axis of the hue errors. Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi 89:10891093Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dain SJ, Birch J (1987) An averaging method for the interpretation of the farnsworth-munsell 100-hue test—I. congenital colour vision defects. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 7:267–280PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Barton FB, Fong DS, Knatterud GL (2004) Classification of Farnsworth-Munsell 100-hue test results in the early treatment diabetic retinopathy study. Am J Ophthalmol 138:119–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Smith VC, Pokorny J (1996) The design and use of a cone chromaticity space: a tutorial. Color Res Appl 21:375–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Boynton RM (1986) A system of photometry and colorimetry based on cone excitations. Color Res Appl 11:244–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Capilla P, Díez-Ajenjo MA, Luque MJ, Malo J (2004) Corresponding-pair procedure: a new approach to simulation of dichromatic color perception. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis 21:176–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Derrington AM, Krauskopf J, Lennie P (1984) Chromatic mechanisms in lateral geniculate nucleus of macaque. J Physiol 357:241–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    de Fez MD, Luque MJ (2017) 3DLUT for iPad 4 (cubic interpolation) Accessed 22 March 2018
  28. 28.
    Vingrys AJ, King-Smith PE (1988) A quantitative scoring technique for panel tests of color vision. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 29:50–63PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Regan BC, Reffin JP, Mollon JD (1994) Luminance noise and the rapid determination of discrimination ellipses in colour deficiency. Vis Res 34:1279–1299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Barbur JL, Rodriguez-Carmona M, Harlow A (2006) Establishing the statistical limits of “normal” chromatic sensitivity. Paper presented at the CIE Expert Symposium, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, 16-17 May 2006Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Arden GB, Gunduz K, Perry S (1988) Colour vision testing with a computer graphics system. Clin Vis Sci 2:303–320Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Arden GB, Wolf JE (2004) Colour vision testing as an aid diagnosis and management of age related maculopathy. Br J Ophthalmol 88:1180–1185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    O’Neill-Biba M, Sivaprasad S, Rodriguez-Carmona M, Wolf JE, Barbur JL (2010) Loss of chromatic sensitivity in AMD and diabetes: a comparative study. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 30:705–716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rabin J, Gooch J, Ivan D (2011) Rapid quantification of color vision: the cone contrast test. Investig Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52:816–820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rodríguez-Carmona M, Sharpe LT, Harlow JA, Barbur JL (2008) Sex-related differences in chromatic sensitivity. Vis Neurosci 25:433–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Birch J (1997) Efficiency of the Ishihara test for identifying red-green colour deficiency. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 17:403–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Birch J (1989) Use of the Farnsworth-Munsell 100 hue test in the examination of congenital colour vision defects. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 9:156–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Seshadri J, Christensen J, Lakshminarayanan V, Bassi CJ (2005) Evaluation of the new web-based “colour assessment and diagnosis” test. Optom Vis Sci 82:882–885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Viliunas V, Lukauskiene R, Svegzda A, Zukauskas A (2006) End-box scoring artefact evaluation of the Farnsworth-Munsell 100-hue colour vision test. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 26:580–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Optics, Pharmacology and AnatomyUniversity of AlicanteAlicanteSpain
  2. 2.Department of OpticsUniversity of ValenciaValenciaSpain
  3. 3.Department of OphthalmologyVithas Medimar International HospitalAlicanteSpain

Personalised recommendations