Literature DB >> 16723494

The letter contrast sensitivity test: clinical evaluation of a new design.

Sharon A Haymes1, Kenneth F Roberts, Alan F Cruess, Marcelo T Nicolela, Raymond P LeBlanc, Michael S Ramsey, Balwantray C Chauhan, Paul H Artes.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Mars Letter Contrast Sensitivity (CS) Test to the Pelli-Robson CS Chart.
METHODS: One eye of 47 normal control subjects, 27 patients with open-angle glaucoma, and 17 with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) was tested twice with the Mars test and twice with the Pelli-Robson test, in random order on separate days. In addition, 17 patients undergoing cataract surgery were tested, once before and once after surgery.
RESULTS: The mean Mars CS was 1.62 log CS (0.06 SD) for normal subjects aged 22 to 77 years, with significantly lower values in patients with glaucoma or AMD (P<0.001). Mars test-retest 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were +/-0.13, +/-0.19, and +/-0.24 log CS for normal, glaucoma, and AMD, respectively. In comparison, Pelli-Robson test-retest 95% LOA were +/-0.18, +/-0.19, and +/-0.33 log CS. The Spearman correlation between the Mars and Pelli-Robson tests was 0.83 (P<0.001). However, systematic differences were observed, particularly at the upper-normal end of the range, where Mars CS was lower than Pelli-Robson CS. After cataract surgery, Mars and Pelli-Robson effect size statistics were 0.92 and 0.88, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate the Mars test has test-retest reliability equal to or better than the Pelli-Robson test and comparable responsiveness. The strong correlation between the tests provides evidence the Mars test is valid. However, systematic differences indicate normative values are likely to be different for each test. The Mars Letter CS Test is a useful and practical alternative to the Pelli-Robson CS Chart.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16723494     DOI: 10.1167/iovs.05-1419

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci        ISSN: 0146-0404            Impact factor:   4.799


  30 in total

1.  Evaluation of multiple neurotoxic outcomes in cancer chemotherapy.

Authors:  Bernard Weiss
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.622

Review 2.  Clinical assessment of two new contrast sensitivity charts.

Authors:  Kavitha Thayaparan; Michael D Crossland; Gary S Rubin
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-12-13       Impact factor: 4.638

3.  Visual outcomes and anatomic changes after sub-threshold micropulse yellow laser (577-nm) treatment for chronic central serous chorioretinopathy: long-term follow-up.

Authors:  A Arsan; H S Kanar; A Sonmez
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 3.775

4.  Marked dissociation of photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity even in normal observers.

Authors:  Hannah Hertenstein; Michael Bach; Nikolai Johannes Gross; Flemming Beisse
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Spatial contrast sensitivity: effects of reliability, test-retest repeatability and sample size using the Metropsis software.

Authors:  Thiago Paiva Fernandes; Natalia Leandro de Almeida; Pamela D Butler; Natanael Antonio Santos
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2019-06-05       Impact factor: 3.775

6.  Current Management of Age-Related Macular Degeneration.

Authors:  Cindy Ung; Ines Lains; Joan W Miller; Ivana K Kim
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2021       Impact factor: 2.622

7.  Multispectral measurement of contrast in tissue-mimicking phantoms in near-infrared spectral range of 650 to 1600 nm.

Authors:  Daniel Salo; Hairong Zhang; David M Kim; Mikhail Y Berezin
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.170

8.  Impact of Dry Eye on Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity: Dry Eye Assessment and Management Study.

Authors:  Loretta B Szczotka-Flynn; Maureen G Maguire; Gui-Shuang Ying; Meng C Lin; Vatinee Y Bunya; Reza Dana; Penny A Asbell
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 1.973

9.  Function in the human connectome: task-fMRI and individual differences in behavior.

Authors:  Deanna M Barch; Gregory C Burgess; Michael P Harms; Steven E Petersen; Bradley L Schlaggar; Maurizio Corbetta; Matthew F Glasser; Sandra Curtiss; Sachin Dixit; Cindy Feldt; Dan Nolan; Edward Bryant; Tucker Hartley; Owen Footer; James M Bjork; Russ Poldrack; Steve Smith; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Abraham Z Snyder; David C Van Essen
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 10.  Chemobrain: a translational challenge for neurotoxicology.

Authors:  Bernard Weiss
Journal:  Neurotoxicology       Date:  2008-04-09       Impact factor: 4.294

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.