A Robust and Reliable Test to Measure Stereopsis in the Clinic

Hess, Robert F.; Ding, Rifeng; Clavagnier, Simon; Liu, Catherine; Guo, Cindy X.; Viner, Catherine; Barrett, Brendan T.; Radia, Krupali; Zhou, Jiawei

doi:10.1167/iovs.15-18690

Cited by 31 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A staircase method was employed to determine stereoacuity threshold (arc sec). The logarithmic stereoacuity value at 50% correct was used to extrapolate the linear stereoacuity threshold reported in seconds of arc . Figure provides an example staircase and frequency of seeing curve.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From suppression to stereoacuity: a composite binocular function score for clinical research

Webber

Wood

Thompson

et al. 2019

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study aimed to validate a binocular function score that is based on common clinical measures of visual function, providing a more complete analysis of binocular outcomes, against laboratory-based dichoptic tests of threshold stereoacuity and depth of suppression. Methods: Scores on a composite binocular function (BF) score derived from clinical stereoacuity measures (Randot Preschool Stereoacuity Test and Randot Butterfly) and the Worth 4 Dot test were determined in adults (n = 20; age 24.8 ± 7.2 years) and children (N = 77; age 8.3 ± 1.7 years) with abnormal binocular vision from strabismus or amblyopia. Adults had threshold stereoacuity measured with a novel, computerised dichoptic psychophysical test of stereopsis. Depth of suppression (dichoptic eye chart inter-ocular contrast balance test) was determined in both adults and children. Results: Clinical Randot stereoacuity was measurable in 50% of adult and 61% of child participants. Threshold stereoacuity was measurable in 65% of the adult participants. The presence of suppression or simultaneous perception (flat fusion or diplopia) was measurable in all participants, enabling assignment of a BF score to all participants in both groups. In adults, the BF score was highly correlated with the psychophysical threshold stereoacuity measure (ρ = 0.71; p < 0.001). In both adults and children, there was also a high correlation between the BF score and inter-ocular contrast balance (adult ρ = 0.90; child ρ = 0.86; p < 0.001). Conclusions: The composite BF score is a convenient and valid scale of binocularity that can be used to extend the stereoacuity measure in cohorts where nil stereoacuity is common and thus could be considered as an outcome measure in clinical trials.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From suppression to stereoacuity: a composite binocular function score for clinical research

Webber

Wood

Thompson

et al. 2019

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One key finding was that as many as 30% of people with otherwise normal vision were over 10 times worse than their fellows. While this might be surprising to clinicians because the present clinical tests do not reflect this 2 , it is not surprising to vision scientists, as there have been a number of laboratory studies that have suggested this 1, 3–9 . Although the reason for this stereo deficiency is presently unclear, Richards 4, 5 originally suggested that it may reflect a loss of a subset of disparity-sensitive neurons that process just crossed or just uncrossed disparities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 72%

“…Recently, we developed a convenient method 1 for measuring stereopsis for the clinic using an iPod, which involves depth discrimination of clouds of random dots; the subject was presented with two circular stimuli in depth side-by-side, one was in front of the screen (crossed disparity), the other was behind the screen (uncrossed disparity); the subject was asked to detect which of the two stimuli was behind the screen (i.e., a depth sign judgement). Disparity as varied using a staircase procedure until a threshold was reached.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One plausible reason why the current clinical tests 2 have failed to detect this is because they rely exclusively on detection of depth magnitude (i.e., a single polarity increment judgement) rather than depth sign. To test this, we have developed a different version of our previously published iPod clinical test 1 that involves a detection of depths of fixed polarity (i.e., single polarity depth increment, as the majority of current clinical approaches do) rather than one that is dependent of depth polarity 1 . We show that the high prevalence of stereo-deficiency within the normal population can only be revealed using a task that is dependent on depth polarity.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Deficient stereopsis in the normal population revisited: why current clinical stereo tests may not be adequate

Hess

Dillon

Ding

et al. 2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

9Significance statement: Applied applications for occupational screening, clinical tests should 3 0 assess sensitivity to the sign as well as the magnitude of disparity. 1Purpose: To determine why the high incidence of stereo anomaly found using laboratory tests 3 2 with polarity-based increment judgements (i.e., depth sign) is not reflected in clinical 3 3 measurements that involve single-polarity incremental judgements (i.e., depth magnitude). 4Methods: An iPod-based measurement that involved the detection of an oriented shape defined 3 5 by a single polarity-depth increment within a random dot display was used. A staircase 3 6 procedure was used to gather sufficient trials to derive a meaningful measure of variance for the 3 7 measurement of stereopsis over a large disparity range. Forty-five adults with normal binocular 3 8 vision (20 -65 years old) and normal or corrected-to-normal (0 logMAR or better) monocular 3 9vision participated in this study. 0Results: Observers' stereo acuities ranged between 10 and 100 arc seconds, and were 4 1 normally distributed on a log scale (p = 0.90, 2-tailed Shapiro-Wilk test). The present results 4 2 using a single polarity depth increment task (i.e., depth magnitude) show a similar distribution to 4 3 those using a similar task using the Randot preschool stereo test on individuals between the 4 4 ages of 19-35 using either the 4-book test (n = 33) or the 3-book test (n = 40), but very different 4 5 results when the iPod test involved a polarity-based increment judgement (i.e., depth sign). 4 6 Conclusions: The present clinical stereo tests are based on magnitude judgements and are 4 7 unable to detect the high percentage of stereo anomalous individuals in the normal population 4 8 revealed using depth sign judgements.4 9

show abstract

“…At near, for example, the dominant quasi‐emmetropic eye without the small‐aperture device has a retinal image with higher illuminance but greater blur, so that visual acuity in that eye is markedly reduced. Stereopsis is relatively robust against modest differences in retinal illuminance but is degraded by reduced monocular visual acuity of this type …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pinholes and presbyopia: solution or sideshow?

Charman

2019

Ophthalmic Physiologic Optic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Robust and Reliable Test to Measure Stereopsis in the Clinic

Abstract: The application enables measurements over the wide disparity range and not just at the finest disparities. In addition, it allows changes in stereopsis of the order of 1.9 to be statistically distinguished.

Cited by 31 publications

References 30 publications

From suppression to stereoacuity: a composite binocular function score for clinical research

From suppression to stereoacuity: a composite binocular function score for clinical research

Deficient stereopsis in the normal population revisited: why current clinical stereo tests may not be adequate

Pinholes and presbyopia: solution or sideshow?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About