Literature DB >> 22262233

Reliability of acuities determined with the sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP).

William H Ridder1, Anna Tong, Theresa Floresca.   

Abstract

sVEPs are generally used to rapidly obtain visual acuity. Several studies have determined the reliability of acuity measurements with psychophysical techniques. The aim of this study was to determine the intersession and intrasession variabilities of sVEP measurements. Twenty-four normal, adult subjects took part in this project. Stimulus production and data analyses were done using an Enfant 4010. Standard VEP recording techniques were employed. Data were collected on two separate days (at least 1 week apart). At each visit, two complete sets of sVEP data were collected and averaged. A logMAR acuity chart was also used to determine the acuity at each visit. Paired t tests, 95% confidence intervals, intraclass correlation coefficients, and coefficients of repeatability were used to determine whether there was a difference in the intrasession and intersession acuities. The mean acuity difference and coefficient of repeatability were +0.01 and 0.191 for visit 1 and -0.019 and 0.186 for visit 2, respectively. The mean acuity difference and coefficient of repeatability across visits were +0.008 and 0.176 for the first acuity and-0.02 and 0.170 for the second acuity, respectively. Paired t tests did not find a significant difference between any set of data or the average for visits one and two (all P values > 0.05). The intraclass correlation coefficients comparing the average sVEP data and the logMAR data for visits 1 and 2 were 0.71 and 0.88, respectively. The coefficients of repeatability for the averaged sVEP acuity and the logMAR acuity for the two visits were 0.11 and 0.07, respectively. The repeatability of the sVEP acuity estimate in a large population of adults is similar to that of previous published reports on infants and is nearly as high as that of logMAR acuity chart data. The repeatability is the same for single best estimates of acuity and averaged estimates of acuity across visits.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22262233     DOI: 10.1007/s10633-012-9312-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0012-4486            Impact factor:   2.379


  17 in total

1.  ETDRS-fast: implementing psychophysical adaptive methods to standardized visual acuity measurement with ETDRS charts.

Authors:  M Camparini; P Cassinari; L Ferrigno; C Macaluso
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 4.799

2.  Reliability of binocular vision measurements used in the classification of convergence insufficiency.

Authors:  Michael W Rouse; Eric Borsting; Paul N Deland
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 1.973

3.  Stimulus duration, neural adaptation, and sweep visual evoked potential acuity estimates.

Authors:  W H Ridder; D McCulloch; A M Herbert
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 4.799

4.  Rapid assessment of visual function: an electronic sweep technique for the pattern visual evoked potential.

Authors:  C W Tyler; P Apkarian; D M Levi; K Nakayama
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1979-07       Impact factor: 4.799

5.  Retinal visual acuity with pattern VEP normal subjects and reproducibility.

Authors:  F Simon; B Rassow
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Evaluation of methods for assessing visual function of infants.

Authors:  T C Prager; Y L Zou; C L Jensen; J K Fraley; R E Anderson; W C Heird
Journal:  J AAPOS       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 1.220

8.  On the statistical reliability of letter-chart visual acuity measurements.

Authors:  A Arditi; R Cagenello
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 4.799

9.  Threshold determination in sweep VEP and the effects of criterion.

Authors:  Naveen Kr Yadav; Fahad Almoqbel; Liseann Head; Elizabeth L Irving; Susan J Leat
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-06-24       Impact factor: 2.379

10.  Predicting potential acuities in amblyopes: predicting post-therapy acuity in amblyopes.

Authors:  William H Ridder; Michael W Rouse
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-02-20       Impact factor: 1.854

View more
  9 in total

1.  A comparison of contrast sensitivity and sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP) acuity estimates in normal humans.

Authors:  William H Ridder
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 2.379

2.  Objective assessment of visual acuity: a refined model for analyzing the sweep VEP.

Authors:  Torsten Strasser; Fadi Nasser; Hana Langrová; Ditta Zobor; Łukasz Lisowski; Dominic Hillerkuss; Carla Sailer; Anne Kurtenbach; Eberhart Zrenner
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  A comparison of the performance of three visual evoked potential-based methods to estimate visual acuity.

Authors:  Anne Kurtenbach; Hana Langrová; Andre Messias; Eberhart Zrenner; Herbert Jägle
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-11-11       Impact factor: 2.379

4.  Comparing enfant and PowerDiva sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP) acuity estimates.

Authors:  William H Ridder; Bradley S Waite; Timothy F Melton
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-08-24       Impact factor: 2.379

5.  A novel and cheap method to correlate subjective and objective visual acuity by using the optokinetic response.

Authors:  Carlo Aleci; Martina Scaparrotti; Sabrina Fulgori; Lorenzo Canavese
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-09-19       Impact factor: 2.031

Review 6.  VEP estimation of visual acuity: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ruth Hamilton; Michael Bach; Sven P Heinrich; Michael B Hoffmann; J Vernon Odom; Daphne L McCulloch; Dorothy A Thompson
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-06-02       Impact factor: 2.379

7.  The parameters of pattern visual evoked potential in the severe visual loss patients in Korean.

Authors:  Min Kyung Kim; Ungsoo Samuel Kim
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-05-20

8.  Does Oblique Effect Affect SSVEP-Based Visual Acuity Assessment?

Authors:  Xiaowei Zheng; Guanghua Xu; Yuhui Du; Hui Li; Chengcheng Han; Peiyuan Tian; Zejin Li; Chenghang Du; Wenqiang Yan; Sicong Zhang
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-01-14       Impact factor: 4.677

Review 9.  Assessment of Human Visual Acuity Using Visual Evoked Potential: A Review.

Authors:  Xiaowei Zheng; Guanghua Xu; Kai Zhang; Renghao Liang; Wenqiang Yan; Peiyuan Tian; Yaguang Jia; Sicong Zhang; Chenghang Du
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 3.576

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.