Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28337792›Full record

ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2017

Overestimation of stereo thresholds by the TNO stereotest is not due to global stereopsis.

Kathleen Vancleef, Jenny C A Read, William Herbert, Nicola Goodship, Maeve Woodhouse, Ignacio Serrano-Pedraza

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Differences in stereoacuity between crossed and uncrossed disparities reduce with practice.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2022
    Article
  12. Evaluation of stereoacuity with a digital mobile application.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2021
    Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. ASTEROID stereotest v1.0: lower stereo thresholds using smaller, denser and faster dots.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2020
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Kathleen VancleefInstitute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK.
Jenny C A ReadInstitute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK.
William HerbertInstitute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK.
Nicola GoodshipInstitute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK.
Maeve WoodhouseInstitute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK.
Ignacio Serrano-PedrazaFaculty of Psychology, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

Department of Health HICF-R8-442Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT102565/Z/13/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIt has been repeatedly shown that the TNO stereotest overestimates stereo threshold compared to other clinical stereotests. In the current study, we test whether this overestimation can be attributed to a distinction between 'global' (or 'cyclopean') and 'local' (feature or contour-based) stereopsis.

methodsWe compared stereo thresholds of a global (TNO) and a local clinical stereotest (Randot Circles). In addition, a global and a local psychophysical stereotest were added to the design. One hundred and forty-nine children between 4 and 16 years old were included in the study.

resultsStereo threshold estimates with TNO were a factor of two higher than with any of the other stereotests. No significant differences were found between the other tests. Bland-Altman analyses also indicated low agreement between TNO and the other stereotests, especially for higher stereo threshold estimates. Simulations indicated that the TNO test protocol and test disparities can account for part of this effect. DISCUSSION: The results indicate that the global - local distinction is an unlikely explanation for the overestimated thresholds of TNO. Test protocol and disparities are one contributing factor. Potential additional factors include the nature of the task (TNO requires depth discrimination rather than detection) and the use of anaglyph red/green 3D glasses rather than polarizing filters, which may reduce binocular fusion.

Indexed as

Visual AcuityAdolescentAmblyopiaChildChild, PreschoolDepth PerceptionFemaleHumansMaleSensory ThresholdsStrabismusVision, BinocularVision Testsglobal stereopsislocal stereopsisrandom dot stereogramrandot stereoteststereo thresholdTNO stereotest

Identifiers

PMID28337792
PMCPMC5516234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.