Ocular Dominance and Visual Function Testing

Lopes-Ferreira, Daniela; Neves, Helena; Queirós, António; Faria‐Ribeiro, Miguel; Peixoto-de-Matos, Sofia C.; González-Meijóme, José Manuel

doi:10.1155/2013/238943

Cited by 51 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(34 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…7). This is consistent with a body of previous findings indicating the prevalence of RE sighting dominance (see summary table in Lopes-Ferreira, Neves, Queiros, Faria-Ribeiro, Peixoto-de-Matos & Gonzalez-Méijome, 2013). We also found that RE SED (61.2% of observers) was more prevalent than LE SED (38.8% of observers; see Figs.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Individual differences in sensory eye dominance reflected in the dynamics of binocular rivalry

Dieter

Blake

2017

Vision Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Normal binocular vision emerges from the combination of neural signals arising within separate monocular pathways. It is natural to wonder whether both eyes contribute equally to the unified cyclopean impression we ordinarily experience. Binocular rivalry, which occurs when the inputs to the two eyes are markedly different, affords a useful means for quantifying the balance of influence exerted by the eyes (called sensory eye dominance, SED) and for relating that degree of balance to other aspects of binocular visual function. However, the precise ways in which binocular rivalry dynamics change when the eyes are unbalanced remain uncharted. Relying on widespread individual variability in the relative predominance of the two eyes as demonstrated in previous studies, we found that an observer’s overall tendency to see one eye more than the other was driven both by differences in the relative duration and frequency of instances of that eye’s perceptual dominance. Specifically, larger imbalances between the eyes were associated with longer and more frequent periods of exclusive dominance for the stronger eye. Increases in occurrences of dominant eye percepts were mediated in part by a tendency to experience “return transitions” to the predominant eye – that is, observers often experienced sequential exclusive percepts of the dominant eye’s image with an intervening mixed percept. Together, these results indicate that the often-observed imbalances between the eyes during binocular rivalry reflect true differences in sensory processing, a finding that has implications for our understanding of the mechanisms underlying binocular vision in general.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Individual differences in sensory eye dominance reflected in the dynamics of binocular rivalry

Dieter

Blake

2017

Vision Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We believe that the right eye significantly had a higher degree of myopia is related to ocular dominance. It is known that right eye dominance is more common than left eye dominance in human population [9]. In a study including 543 Singaporean children, Chia et al [10] reported that when the interocular difference in refractive power exceeded 1.50 D, the dominant eye was more myopic in 56 % of the patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of myopic anisometropia on anterior and posterior ocular segment parameters

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to investigate the differences in anterior and posterior segment parameters of more myopic eyes compared to fellow eyes using spectral domain optical coherence tomography and optical biometer device in patients with myopic anisometropia. This prospective cross-sectional study included 42 myopic anisometropic patients with and without amblyopia, aged between 7 and 40 years old. The refractive error and keratometry values, axial length (AL), central corneal thickness (CCT), peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFLT), and central macular thickness (CMT) were evaluated. Eighteen of the patients had myopic anisometropia with amblyopia, and the remaining 24 had myopic anisometropia without amblyopia. There were 23 female and 19 male patients with a mean age as 23.67 ± 10.12 years (range 7-40). The right eyes of the subjects significantly had a higher degree of myopia. There was a significant difference in mean best-corrected visual acuity (0.195 ± 0.234 vs. 0.011 ± 0.025 logMAR, p < 0.001), spherical equivalent refraction (-3.95 ± 1.38 vs. -1.04 ± 0.99 D, p < 0.001), AL (25.06 ± 1.27 vs. 23.99 ± 0.98 mm, p < 0.001), and RNFLT (89.24 ± 12.84 vs. 94.57 ± 10.81 μm, p < 0.001) between the more myopic and fellow eyes in all patients. On the contrary, there was no significant difference in CMT and anterior segment parameters including mean keratometry and CCT in all patients and either group. During the development of the myopic anisometropia, more myopic eyes have significantly more myopic refraction, longer AL and thinner RNFLT compared to the fellow eyes.

show abstract

“…Sensory dominance was assessed on all participants using the alternate blur method 24 (single +1.50 D trial lens alternated in front of the participant's eyes with the eye reporting greatest subjective blur deemed the dominant eye), and if the dominant eye was identified, no more eye dominance testing was performed. If sensory eye dominance could not be identified, sighting eye dominance was determined using the sighting method 24 (“hole-in-the-hand technique”).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short-term comparison between extended depth-of-focus prototype contact lenses and a commercially-available center-near multifocal

Tilia

Munro

Chung

et al. 2017

Journal of Optometry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo compare the visual performance of prototype contact lenses which extend depth-of-focus (EDOF) by deliberate manipulation of multiple higher-order spherical aberration terms and a commercially-available center-near lens (AIR OPTIX Aqua Multifocal, AOMF).MethodsThis was a prospective, cross-over, randomized, single-masked (participant), short-term clinical trial where 52 participants (age 45–70 years) were stratified as low, medium or high presbyopes and wore EDOF and AOMF on different days. Objective measures comprised high and low contrast visual acuity (HCVA/LCVA, log MAR), and contrast sensitivity (log units) at 6 m; HCVA at 70 cm, 50 cm and 40 cm and stereopsis (seconds of arc) at 40 cm. HCVA at 70 cm, 50 cm and 40 cm were measured as “comfortable acuity” rather than conventional resolution acuity. Subjective measures comprised clarity-of-vision and ghosting at distance, intermediate and near, overall vision satisfaction and ocular comfort (1–10 numeric rating scale) and lens purchase (yes/no response). Statistical analysis included repeated measures ANOVA, paired t-tests and McNemar's test.ResultsSignificant differences between lens types were independent of strata (p ≥ 0.119). EDOF was significantly better than AOMF for HCVA at 40 cm (0.42 ± 0.18 vs. 0.48 ± 0.22, p = 0.024), stereopsis (98 ± 88 vs. 141 ± 114, p < 0.001), clarity-of-vision at intermediate (8.5 ± 1.6 vs. 7.7 ± 1.9, p = 0.006) and near (7.3 ± 2.5 vs. 6.2 ± 2.5, p = 0.005), lack-of-ghosting (p = 0.012), overall vision satisfaction (7.5 ± 1.7 vs. 6.4 ± 2.2, p < 0.001) and ocular comfort (9.0 ± 1.0 vs. 8.3 ± 1.7, p = 0.002). Significantly more participants chose to only-purchase EDOF (33% vs. 6%, p = 0.003).). There were no significant differences between lens types for any objective measure at 6 m or clarity-of-vision at distance (p ≥ 0.356).ConclusionsEDOF provides better intermediate and near vision performance in presbyopes than AOMF with no difference for distance vision during short-term wear.

show abstract

Ocular Dominance and Visual Function Testing

Cited by 51 publications

References 29 publications

Individual differences in sensory eye dominance reflected in the dynamics of binocular rivalry

Individual differences in sensory eye dominance reflected in the dynamics of binocular rivalry

Effect of myopic anisometropia on anterior and posterior ocular segment parameters

Short-term comparison between extended depth-of-focus prototype contact lenses and a commercially-available center-near multifocal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About