Literature DB >> 2771329

Effect of defocus on visual acuity as measured by source and observer methods.

G Smith1, R J Jacobs, C D Chan.   

Abstract

The relation between refractive error and visual acuity has been measured by two very different methods. In one called "source methods," emmetropes or corrected ametropes view defocused stimuli presented on projection screens or photographs. In the type called "observer methods," focused stimuli are presented to the observers who are either uncorrected ametropes or emmetropes defocused by lenses placed (usually), in the spectacle plane. The study reported in this paper demonstrates for the first time that these two methods of defocusing retinal images and their effects on visual acuity can be correlated. Results show that the source method of producing defocus could be used interchangeably with the observer method in investigating the rates of change of visual acuity with defocus for young normal observers. The angular diameter of the defocused image of a point, the blur disc diameter in object space, allows the two methods to be compared. Although the results show that the two methods are highly correlated, they show that the source method gives a statistically but not clinically significant lower acuity. The results of both methods are used to derive an equation linking refractive error, visual acuity, and pupil diameter.

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2771329     DOI: 10.1097/00006324-198907000-00004

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


  13 in total

1.  Focus cues affect perceived depth.

Authors:  Simon J Watt; Kurt Akeley; Marc O Ernst; Martin S Banks
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2005-12-15       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  The effect of dioptric blur on reading performance.

Authors:  Susana T L Chung; Samuel H Jarvis; Sing-Hang Cheung
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-04-17       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Optimizing wavefront-guided corrections for highly aberrated eyes in the presence of registration uncertainty.

Authors:  Yue Shi; Hope M Queener; Jason D Marsack; Ayeswarya Ravikumar; Harold E Bedell; Raymond A Applegate
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-06-11       Impact factor: 2.240

4.  Visual impact of Zernike and Seidel forms of monochromatic aberrations.

Authors:  Xu Cheng; Arthur Bradley; Sowmya Ravikumar; Larry N Thibos
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 1.973

5.  Relative contributions of the two eyes to perceived egocentric visual direction in normal binocular vision.

Authors:  Deepika Sridhar; Harold E Bedell
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 1.886

6.  Six just-noticeable differences in retinal image quality in 1 line of visual acuity: toward quantification of happy versus unhappy patients with 20/20 acuity.

Authors:  Ayeswarya Ravikumar; Raymond A Applegate; Yue Shi; Harold E Bedell
Journal:  J Cataract Refract Surg       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 3.351

7.  Change in visual acuity is highly correlated with change in six image quality metrics independent of wavefront error and/or pupil diameter.

Authors:  Ayeswarya Ravikumar; Edwin J Sarver; Raymond A Applegate
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2012-09-14       Impact factor: 2.240

8.  Effect of sampling array irregularity and window size on the discrimination of sampled gratings.

Authors:  David W Evans; Yizhong Wang; Kevin M Haggerty; Larry N Thibos
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Binocular retinal image differences influence eye-position signals for perceived visual direction.

Authors:  Deepika Sridhar; Harold E Bedell
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2012-04-26       Impact factor: 1.886

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.