Literature DB >> 20125061

Evaluation of image quality metrics for the prediction of subjective best focus.

Marina Kilintari1, Aristophanis Pallikaris, Nikolaos Tsiklis, Harilaos S Ginis.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Seven existing and three new image quality metrics were evaluated in terms of their effectiveness in predicting subjective cycloplegic refraction.
METHODS: Monochromatic wavefront aberrations (WA) were measured in 70 eyes using a Shack-Hartmann based device (Complete Ophthalmic Analysis System; Wavefront Sciences). Subjective cycloplegic spherocylindrical correction was obtained using a standard manifest refraction procedure. The dioptric amount required to optimize each metric was calculated and compared with the subjective refraction result. Metrics included monochromatic and polychromatic variants, as well as variants taking into consideration the Stiles and Crawford effect (SCE). WA measurements were performed using infrared light and converted to visible before all calculations.
RESULTS: The mean difference between subjective cycloplegic and WA-derived spherical refraction ranged from 0.17 to 0.36 diopters (D), while paraxial curvature resulted in a difference of 0.68 D. Monochromatic metrics exhibited smaller mean differences between subjective cycloplegic and objective refraction. Consideration of the SCE reduced the standard deviation (SD) of the difference between subjective and objective refraction.
CONCLUSIONS: All metrics exhibited similar performance in terms of accuracy and precision. We hypothesize that errors pertaining to the conversion between infrared and visible wavelengths rather than calculation method may be the limiting factor in determining objective best focus from near infrared WA measurements.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20125061     DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181cdde32

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  6 in total

1.  Is an objective refraction optimised using the visual Strehl ratio better than a subjective refraction?

Authors:  Gareth D Hastings; Jason D Marsack; Lan Chi Nguyen; Han Cheng; Raymond A Applegate
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Normative best-corrected values of the visual image quality metric VSX as a function of age and pupil size.

Authors:  Gareth D Hastings; Jason D Marsack; Larry N Thibos; Raymond A Applegate
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 2.129

3.  Image Quality Metric Derived Refractions Predicted to Improve Visual Acuity Beyond Habitual Refraction for Patients With Down Syndrome.

Authors:  Ayeswarya Ravikumar; Julia S Benoit; Jason D Marsack; Heather A Anderson
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2019-05-20       Impact factor: 3.283

Review 4.  Wavefront sensing, novel lower degree/higher degree polynomial decomposition and its recent clinical applications: A review.

Authors:  Radhika Rampat; Jacques Malet; Laurent Dumas; Damien Gatinel
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 1.848

5.  Agreement of wavefront-based refraction, dry and cycloplegic autorefraction with subjective refraction.

Authors:  Shahram Bamdad; Hamed Momeni-Moghaddam; Milad Abdolahian; David P Piñero
Journal:  J Optom       Date:  2020-09-28

6.  Comparison of Two Wavefront Autorefractors: Binocular Open-Field versus Monocular Closed-Field.

Authors:  Gonzalo Carracedo; Carlos Carpena-Torres; Laura Batres; Maria Serramito; Anahí Gonzalez-Bergaz
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-01-03       Impact factor: 1.909

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.