A Random Dot E Stereogram for the Vision Screening of Children

Hammond, Robert S.; Schmidt, Paulette P.

doi:10.1001/archopht.1986.01050130064021

Cited by 54 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Not surprisingly, it is one of the visual discriminations most easily disrupted by abnormal visual experience. Therefore tests of stereopsis have great promise as screening tests for abnormal visual function [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 47%

Dynamic stereoacuity: A comparison of electrophysiological and psychophysical responses in normal and stereoblind observers

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We compared stereoscopic thresholds determined psychophysically and by using visually evoked potentials in normal adult and stereoblind subjects. For normal observers there was a strong linear relationship between visual evoked potential amplitude and disparity (r = 0.86 on average). However, stereoblind observers' responses showed no relationship to disparity (r = 0.18 on average). For normal observers, log visual evoked potential stereo thresholds determined by an extrapolation procedure were on average within 0.17 octaves of the psychophysically determined log thresholds. They did not differ significantly from psychophysical thresholds, and they correlated significantly with behavioral thresholds (r = 0.86).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 47%

Dynamic stereoacuity: A comparison of electrophysiological and psychophysical responses in normal and stereoblind observers

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, Simons, who compared different stereotests in 179 three to five year olds surprisingly showed only a 1% over-referral rate for RDE, with rescreening apparently eliminating all over-referrals. l 2 One preschool child in our study passed the RDE with ease at one metre despite apparent amblyopia. In Reinecke and Simons' original study,' no patient with more than two lines difference in visual acuity between eyes, or less than 6/12 in the worse eye with correction, passed the RDE at one metre.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 39%

Random dot stereogram E in vision screening of children

Hope

Maslin

1990

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The random dot stereogram E (RDE) has been shown to be a simple and effective test for the detection of binocular abnormalities and defective visual acuity in ~hi1dren.l.~ We determined the validity of the RDE as a screening test for reduced visual acuity, amblyopia and strabismus in two separate populations of children.A nonselective group of 100 school children (aged 5 to 15 years) who presented consecutively to the ophthalmology department at Auckland Public Hospital were tested with the RDE. All cases of amblyopia and strabismus were detected by the RDE. Similar screening with the RDE test of 168 preschool children (aged three to four years) in the community resulted in an unacceptably high overreferral rate. The test was unreliable in the preschool age group because of difficulty in distinguishing between test failure and non-cooperation with the test. The low positive predictive value of the test in the younger age group suggests the test to be unsuitable for preschool vision screening.

show abstract

“…It has already been reported by Hammond and Schmidt,14that refractive errors of up to +3.00 dioptres of hyperopia, 1.50 D of astigmatism, and 2.0 D of myopia were present in children who passed the RDES at a high threshold of 2 metres distance (168 seconds of arc). This would explain the large difference obtained in our pilot study between abnormal visual acuity and absent stereopsis where the RDES was performed at a low threshold 40 cm distance (638 seconds of arc).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

A new computer program for mass screening of visual defects in preschool children

Briscoe

Lifshitz

Grotman

et al. 1998

British Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims-To test the eVectiveness of a PC computer program for detecting vision disorders which could be used by nontrained personnel, and to determine the prevalence of visual impairment in a sample population of preschool children in the city of Beer-Sheba, Israel. Methods-292 preschool children, aged 4-6 years, were examined in the kindergarten setting, using the computer system and "gold standard" tests. Visual acuity and stereopsis were tested and compared using Snellen type symbol charts and random dot stereograms respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and kappa test were evaluated. A computer pseudo Worth four dot test was also performed but could not be compared with the standard Worth four dot test owing to the inability of many children to count. Results-Agreement between computer and gold standard tests was 83% and 97.3% for visual acuity and stereopsis respectively. The sensitivity of the computer stereogram was only 50%, but it had a specificity of 98.9%, whereas the sensitivity and specificity of the visual acuity test were 81.5% and 83% respectively. The positive predictive value of both tests was about 63%. 27.7% of children tested had a visual acuity of 6/12 or less and stereopsis was absent in 28% using standard tests. Impairment of fusion was found in 5% of children using the computer pseudo Worth four dot test. Conclusions-The computer program was found to be stimulating, rapid, and easy to perform. The wide availability of computers in schools and at home allow it to be used as an additional screening tool by non-trained personnel, such as teachers and parents, but it is not a replacement for standard testing. (Br J Ophthalmol 1998;82:415-418)

show abstract

A Random Dot E Stereogram for the Vision Screening of Children

Cited by 54 publications

References 15 publications

Dynamic stereoacuity: A comparison of electrophysiological and psychophysical responses in normal and stereoblind observers

Dynamic stereoacuity: A comparison of electrophysiological and psychophysical responses in normal and stereoblind observers

Random dot stereogram E in vision screening of children

A new computer program for mass screening of visual defects in preschool children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About