Literature DB >> 17251499

Human infants' accommodation responses to dynamic stimuli.

Grazyna M Tondel1, T Rowan Candy.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: A young infant's environment routinely consists of moving objects. The dynamics of the infant accommodative system are almost unknown and yet have a large impact on habitual retinal image quality and visual experience. The goal of this study was to record infants' dynamic accommodative responses to stimuli moving at a range of velocities.
METHODS: Binocular accommodative responses were recorded at 25 Hz. Data from infants 8 to 20 weeks of age and pre-presbyopic adults were analyzed. A high-contrast image of a clown was moved between 20- and 50-cm viewing distances at four velocities (a step, 50 cm/s, 20 cm/s, and 5 cm/s).
RESULTS: Most infants who had clear responses were able to initiate their response within a second of stimulus onset. The infants were able to discriminate the different stimulus velocities and to adjust their response velocities and durations in an appropriate fashion.
CONCLUSIONS: The data indicate that by the third postnatal month infants are able to respond with latencies within a factor of two of adults' and that there is little immaturity in the motor capabilities of the accommodative system compared with the sensory visual system at the same age.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17251499      PMCID: PMC2755532          DOI: 10.1167/iovs.06-0734

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


  49 in total

1.  Variations in accommodation and convergence responses in a minimally controlled photorefractive setting.

Authors:  A M Horwood; J E Turner; S M Houston; P M Riddell
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 1.973

2.  Peripheral refractive errors in myopic, emmetropic, and hyperopic young subjects.

Authors:  Anne Seidemann; Frank Schaeffel; Antonio Guirao; Noberto Lopez-Gil; Pablo Artal
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 2.129

3.  Amplitude dependent accommodative dynamics in humans.

Authors:  Sanjeev Kasthurirangan; Abhiram S Vilupuru; Adrian Glasser
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Development of gaze tracking of small and large objects.

Authors:  Kerstin Rosander; Claes von Hofsten
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2002-06-26       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Repeatability and validity of the PowerRefractor and the Nidek AR600-A in an adult population with healthy eyes.

Authors:  Peter M Allen; Hema Radhakrishnan; Daniel J O'Leary
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 1.973

6.  Continuous measurement of accommodation in human factor applications.

Authors:  J S Wolffsohn; O A Hunt; B Gilmartin
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  Laboratory, clinical, and kindergarten test of a new eccentric infrared photorefractor (PowerRefractor).

Authors:  M Choi; S Weiss; F Schaeffel; A Seidemann; H C Howland; B Wilhelm; H Wilhelm
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 1.973

8.  Cycloplegic refractions in healthy children aged 1 through 48 months.

Authors:  D L Mayer; R M Hansen; B D Moore; S Kim; A B Fulton
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2001-11

9.  Efficiency of a video-autorefractometer used as a screening device for amblyogenic factors.

Authors:  Thilo Schimitzek; Wolfgang Haase
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-08-27       Impact factor: 3.117

10.  Clinical evaluation of an eccentric infrared photorefractor: the PowerRefractor.

Authors:  Maths Abrahamsson; Josefin Ohlsson; Maria Björndahl; Hannah Abrahamsson
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol Scand       Date:  2003-12
View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  Why do only some hyperopes become strabismic?

Authors:  Erin Babinsky; T Rowan Candy
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 4.799

2.  Age-related changes in accommodative dynamics from preschool to adulthood.

Authors:  Heather A Anderson; Adrian Glasser; Ruth E Manny; Karla K Stuebing
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2009-08-13       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  Differences between naïve and expert observers' vergence and accommodative responses to a range of targets.

Authors:  Anna M Horwood; Patricia M Riddell
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  The accommodative lag of the young hyperopic patient.

Authors:  T Rowan Candy; Kathryn H Gray; Christy C Hohenbary; Don W Lyon
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2012-01-17       Impact factor: 4.799

5.  The stability of steady state accommodation in human infants.

Authors:  T Rowan Candy; Shrikant R Bharadwaj
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2007-08-17       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Accommodative and vergence responses to conflicting blur and disparity stimuli during development.

Authors:  Shrikant R Bharadwaj; T Rowan Candy
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2009-10-05       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  The use of cues to convergence and accommodation in naïve, uninstructed participants.

Authors:  Anna M Horwood; Patricia M Riddell
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2008-06-06       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Accommodation and vergence latencies in human infants.

Authors:  Grazyna M Tondel; T Rowan Candy
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2008-01-15       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  The sensitivity of the 2- to 4-month-old human infant accommodation system.

Authors:  Jingyun Wang; T Rowan Candy
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2009-12-30       Impact factor: 4.799

10.  Longitudinal chromatic aberration of the human infant eye.

Authors:  Jingyun Wang; T Rowan Candy; Danielle F W Teel; Robert J Jacobs
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 2.129

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.