Diagnostic reliability and normative values of stereoacuity tests in preschool-aged children

Afsari, Sonia; Rose, Kathryn A.; Pai, Amy; Gole, Glen A.; Leone, Jody Fay; Burlutsky, George; Mitchell, Paul

doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2012-302192

Cited by 24 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…6,15 Most children without VIP Study–targeted vision disorders were able to obtain one of the two best levels of stereoacuity, whereas only a small percentage had either “no measurable stereopsis” or the poorest level. The reduced stereoacuity in a small percentage of children without any VIP Study–targeted vision disorder may be attributable to other unidentified factors, such as poor visual attention, large accommodative lags, or mild undiagnosed cognitive, visual motor, or visual perceptual deficits, which were beyond the scope of this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stereoacuity of Preschool Children with and without Vision Disorders

Ciner¹,

Ying²,

Kulp³

et al. 2014

Optometry and Vision Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To evaluate associations between stereoacuity and presence, type, and severity of vision disorders in Head Start preschool children and determine testability and levels of stereoacuity by age in children without vision disorders. Methods Stereoacuity of children aged 3 to 5 years (n = 2898) participating in the Vision in Preschoolers (VIP) Study was evaluated using the Stereo Smile II test during a comprehensive vision examination. This test uses a two-alternative forced-choice paradigm with four stereoacuity levels (480 to 60 seconds of arc). Children were classified by the presence (n = 871) or absence (n = 2027) of VIP Study–targeted vision disorders (amblyopia, strabismus, significant refractive error, or unexplained reduced visual acuity), including type and severity. Median stereoacuity between groups and among severity levels of vision disorders was compared using Wilcoxon rank sum and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Testability and stereoacuity levels were determined for children without VIP Study–targeted disorders overall and by age. Results Children with VIP Study–targeted vision disorders had significantly worse median stereoacuity than that of children without vision disorders (120 vs. 60 seconds of arc, p < 0.001). Children with the most severe vision disorders had worse stereoacuity than that of children with milder disorders (median 480 vs. 120 seconds of arc, p < 0.001). Among children without vision disorders, testability was 99.6% overall, increasing with age to 100% for 5-year-olds (p = 0.002). Most of the children without vision disorders (88%) had stereoacuity at the two best disparities (60 or 120 seconds of arc); the percentage increasing with age (82% for 3-, 89% for 4-, and 92% for 5-year-olds; p < 0.001). Conclusions The presence of any VIP Study–targeted vision disorder was associated with significantly worse stereoacuity in preschool children. Severe vision disorders were more likely associated with poorer stereopsis than milder or no vision disorders. Testability was excellent at all ages. These results support the validity of the Stereo Smile II for assessing random-dot stereoacuity in preschool children.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stereoacuity of Preschool Children with and without Vision Disorders

Ciner¹,

Ying²,

Kulp³

et al. 2014

Optometry and Vision Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Stereopsis is the highest form of binocular coordination that can be assessed [18]. Despite the wide variety of visual stimuli (contour and random dot, static and dynamic) and response measures (forced-choice preferential looking, visual evoked potential, and eye movements) used in various studies, there is a general agreement that the onset of stereopsis in typically developing infants occurs at 3 to 4 months of age [19].…”

Section: Battery For Evaluation Of Visual Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of early multisensory massage intervention on visual functions in infants with Down syndrome

Purpura¹,

Tinelli²,

Bargagna³

et al. 2014

Early Human Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Anisometropia was the least detectable condition with DRDSE (AUC = 0.59); this observation was also pointed out by Afsari et al in their study comparing the diagnostic reliability of various stereoacuity tests [71]. It should be considered that relatively good levels of stereopsis can be present in patients with low levels of anisometropia [72].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

Validation of dynamic random dot stereotests in pediatric vision screening

Budai

Czigler

Mikó-Baráth

et al. 2018

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Stereo vision tests are widely used in the clinical practice for screening amblyopia and amblyogenic conditions. According to literature, none of these tests seems to be suitable to be used alone as a simple and reliable tool. There has been a growing interest in developing new types of stereo vision tests, with sufficient sensitivity to detect amblyopia. This new generation of assessment tools should be computer based, and their reliability must be statistically warranted. The present study reports the clinical evaluation of a screening system based on random dot stereograms using a tablet as display. Specifically, a dynamic random dot stereotest with binocularly detectable Snellen-E optotype (DRDSE) was used and compared with the Lang II stereotest. Methods A total of 141 children (aged 4-14, mean age 8.9) were examined in a field study at the Department of Ophthalmology, Pécs, Hungary. Inclusion criteria consisted of diagnoses of amblyopia, anisometropia, convergent strabismus, and hyperopia. Children with no ophthalmic pathologies were also enrolled as controls. All subjects went through a regular pediatric ophthalmological examination before proceeding to the DRDSE and Lang II tests. Results DRDSE and Lang II tests were compared in terms of sensitivity and specificity for different conditions. DRDSE had a 100% sensitivity both for amblyopia (n = 11) and convergent strabismus (n = 21), as well as a 75% sensitivity for hyperopia (n = 36). However, the performance of DRDSE was not statistically significant when screening for anisometropia. On the other hand, Lang II proved to have 81.8% sensitivity for amblyopia, 80.9% for strabismus, and only 52.8% for hyperopia. The specificity of DRDSE was 61.2% for amblyopia, 67.3% for strabismus, and 68.6% for hyperopia, respectively. Conversely, Lang II showed about 10% better specificity, 73.8% for amblyopia, 79.2% for strabismus, and 77.9% for hyperopia. Conclusions The DRDSE test has a better sensitivity for the detection of conditions such as amblyopia or convergent strabismus compared with Lang II, although with slightly lower specificity. If the specificity could be further improved by optimization of the stimulus parameters, while keeping the sensitivity high, DRDSE would be a promising stereo vision test for screening of amblyopia.

show abstract

Diagnostic reliability and normative values of stereoacuity tests in preschool-aged children

Cited by 24 publications

References 21 publications

Stereoacuity of Preschool Children with and without Vision Disorders

Stereoacuity of Preschool Children with and without Vision Disorders

Effect of early multisensory massage intervention on visual functions in infants with Down syndrome

Validation of dynamic random dot stereotests in pediatric vision screening

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About