ArticleJournal of vision2016
Potential role for microfluctuations as a temporal directional cue to accommodation.
Article in Journal of vision, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy and stability of accommodation and vergence responses during sustained near tasks in uncorrected hyperopes.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- The random walk of accommodation fluctuations.Biomedical optics express · 2021Article
- There is more to accommodation of the eye than simply minimizing retinal blur.Biomedical optics express · 2017Article
- Sensitivity of Chaos Measures in Detecting Stress in the Focusing Control Mechanism of the Short-Sighted Eye.Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2017Article
- Dynamic accommodation without feedback does not respond to isolated blur cues.Vision research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The goal was to revisit an important, yet unproven notion that accommodative microfluctuations facilitate the determination of direction (sign) of abrupt focus changes in the stimulus to accommodation. We contaminated the potential temporal cues from natural accommodative microfluctuations by presenting uncorrelated external (screen) temporal defocus noise that combined with the retinal image effects of natural microfluctuations. A polychromatic Maltese spoke pattern thus either modulated defocus at a combination of two temporal frequencies (on-screen noise condition) or was static (control condition). The on-screen conditions were combined with step changes in optical vergence that were randomized in direction and magnitude. Five subjects monocularly viewed stimuli through a Badal optical system in a Maxwellian view. An artificial 4-mm aperture was imaged at the entrance pupil of the eye. Wavefront aberrations were measured dynamically at 50 Hz using a custom Shack-Hartmann aberrometer. Dynamic changes in the Zernike defocus term with step changes in optical vergence were analyzed. We calculated the percentage of correct directional responses for 1, 2, and 3 D accommodative and disaccommodative step stimuli using preset criteria for latency, velocity, and persistence of the response. The on-screen noise condition reduced the percent-correct responses compared to the static stimulus, suggesting that this manipulation affected the detectability of the sign of the accommodative stimulus. Several possible reasons and implications of this result are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.