Search

During COVID‐19, there was increased use of handheld displays in educational settings. There is growing concern that eye health may be affected by prolonged exposure to the light‐emitting diodes used as frontlights or backlights in handheld displays. The potential impact of light exposure from tablet‐sized devices with different display technologies and various spectral outputs was assessed in an in vitro model using human retinal epithelial (ARPE‐19) cells. Cellular response was quantified by measuring reactive oxidative species (ROS) and by analyzing mitochondrial morphology. Control experiments established a baseline ROS response to hazardous blue light exposure and also that red light resulted in no detectable ROS response. Under identical conditions, ROS response increased with time for all devices. However, different device spectra caused ROS to accumulate at different rates. When operating the devices in the same mode (day or night), cells accumulated ROS two to three times more slowly on exposure to frontlit electronic paper displays compared to backlit liquid crystal displays. With increasing ROS accumulation, mitochondrial morphology shifted from elongate interconnected features typically observed under normal conditions to rounded disconnected features associated with oxidative stress response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conducting remote laboratory‐based courses in electronics is a major challenge primarily because of the hardware requirements. This paper describes a laboratory course on information display technologies specially designed and implemented for remote learning. The course was successfully offered during the COVID‐19 lockdown and has an online instruction component to introduce the concepts, as well as a laboratory part involving hands‐on work. The course covers experiments on fundamental concepts related to perception and color, liquid crystal displays (LCD), light‐emitting diodes (LEDs), and a final project where a mechanical display is designed and built. Course assessment based on an anonymous survey shows the hands‐on work enhanced the student learning and improved course understanding from an average of 2.5/5 measured at the start of the course to 4/5 at the end. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]