1981
DOI: 10.1159/000309167
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pupil Cycle Induction Test: A Way of Evaluating the Pupillary Light Reflex

Abstract: The Pupil Cycle Induction Test (PCIT) described here is a simple and sensitive clinical method for the evaluation of afferent pupillary defect. It assesses the difficulty in setting up regular and sustained light-induced pupil oscillations, in contrast to methods assessing the light reflex by timing the oscillations. PCIT was applied to 186 presumably normal eyes (with normal visual acuity and normal fundi). In ten eyes, sustained oscillations could not be induced; further investigation showed that four of the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

1981
1981
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Patterns of changes in oscillations were similar to those described in patients with anterior visual pathway disorders [1]; they have been classified into three groups: (1) immediate alteration; (2) delayed interrup tion of oscillations, without spontaneous re covery, and (3) prolonged pause periods. Striking reduction in amplitude of oscilla tions was moreover observed in 6 patients.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 55%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Patterns of changes in oscillations were similar to those described in patients with anterior visual pathway disorders [1]; they have been classified into three groups: (1) immediate alteration; (2) delayed interrup tion of oscillations, without spontaneous re covery, and (3) prolonged pause periods. Striking reduction in amplitude of oscilla tions was moreover observed in 6 patients.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 55%
“…Compared to the re sults of PCIT in presumably normal eyes [1], this proportion is significant (p<0.001). No significant difference could, however, be demonstrated between chronic and occa sional users (p>0.05).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 80%
See 3 more Smart Citations