Visual evoked potential-based acuity assessment in normal vision, artificially degraded vision, and in patients

Bach, Michael; Mäurer, Johannes; Wolf, M E

doi:10.1136/bjo.2007.130245

Cited by 70 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(18 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Tyler et al [24] used different stimulus areas (15,12,10,8,6,4, and 2˚) to measure sVEP VA in adults. Their findings agree with ours, in which there was no effect of stimulus area on the sVEP threshold, in children or in adults.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One important parameter is the electrode placement. Although many studies [3][4][5][6][7][8] have followed the ISCEV standards [2] for the placement of the active, ground and reference electrodes, others [9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] used different electrode placements, and only one [27] compared between two electrode placements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of sweep VEP parameters on visual acuity and contrast thresholds in children and adults

Almoqbel

Yadav

Leat

et al. 2010

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A temporal frequency of 7.5 Hz, a stimulus area of 4° or larger for VA and 10° or larger for contrast thresholds, and the use of a fixation target gave more viable readings, and may be indicated for future application. Consideration of the number of viable readings showed more differences between parameters than the actual thresholds, and it is suggested that more readings presumably would yield more reliable threshold measurements.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of sweep VEP parameters on visual acuity and contrast thresholds in children and adults

Almoqbel

Yadav

Leat

et al. 2010

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These steps were defined as the epochs either above or below the average thresholds found in previous comparable experiments. 4,18,20,25,30,35 More precisely, for visual acuity, this corresponded to the nine steps with spatial frequency from 2.7 to 9.7 cpd for group E, and to the seven steps from 3.8 to 9.4 cpd for group AA. For contrast sensitivity, this corresponded to the nine steps with contrast from 1.5% to 16%.…”

Section: Eeg Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Rapid Objective Assessment of Contrast Sensitivity and Visual Acuity With Sweep Visual Evoked Potentials and an Extended Electrode Array

Hemptinne¹,

Liu‐Shuang²,

Yüksel

et al. 2018

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE. Sweep visual evoked potentials (sVEPs) provide an implicit, objective, and sensitive evaluation of low-level visual functions such as visual acuity and contrast sensitivity. For practical and traditional reasons, sVEPs in ophthalmologic examinations have usually been recorded over a single or a limited number of electrodes over the medial occipital region. Here we examined whether a higher density of recording electrodes improves the estimation of individual low-level visual thresholds with sVEPS, and to which extent such testing could be streamlined for clinical application. METHODS.To this end, we tested contrast sensitivity and visual acuity in 26 healthy adult volunteers with a 68-electrode electroencephalogram (EEG) system. RESULTS.While the most sensitive electrophysiologic response was found at the traditional medial occipital electrode Oz in a small majority of individuals, it was found at neighboring electrodes for the remaining participants. At the group level, lower spatial frequencies were also associated with right lateralized responses. More generally, visual function was evaluated more sensitively based on EEG recorded at the most sensitive electrode defined individually for each participant. Our data suggest that recording over seven posterior electrodes while limiting the testing session to less than 15 minutes ensures a sensitive and consistent estimation of acuity and contrast sensitivity threshold estimates in every individual.CONCLUSIONS. The present study shows that sampling from a larger number of posterior scalp electrodes is relevant to optimize visual function assessment and could be achieved efficiently in the time-constrained clinical setting.

show abstract

“…Finally, we would like to point out that our technique must be used as an extension of the complete neuro-ophthalmologic examination including, if necessary other examinations such as electrophysiological tests [9], keratography, and brain imaging.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distance doubling visual acuity test: A reliable test for nonorganic visual loss

Zinkernagel

Mojon

2008

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Visual evoked potential-based acuity assessment in normal vision, artificially degraded vision, and in patients

Abstract: The fully automated analysis avoided subjective problems in peak-trough assessment. The results provide quantitative limits to assess patients with possible malingering.

Cited by 70 publications

References 26 publications

Effects of sweep VEP parameters on visual acuity and contrast thresholds in children and adults

Effects of sweep VEP parameters on visual acuity and contrast thresholds in children and adults

Rapid Objective Assessment of Contrast Sensitivity and Visual Acuity With Sweep Visual Evoked Potentials and an Extended Electrode Array

Distance doubling visual acuity test: A reliable test for nonorganic visual loss

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About