ArticlePloS one2018
Useful field of view test performance throughout adulthood in subjects without ocular disorders.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Standardized on-road tests assessing fitness-to-drive in people with cognitive impairments: A systematic review.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- Enhancing Cognitive Function in Older Adults through Processing Speed Training: Implications for Cognitive Health Awareness.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The functional relevance of visuospatial processing speed across the lifespan.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2023Article
- Can Three-Dimensional Multiple Object Tracking Training Be Used to Improve Simulated Driving Performance? A Pilot Study in Young and Older Adults.Journal of cognitive enhancement : towards the integration of theory and practice · 2023Article
- Useful Field of View Performance in the Intact Visual Field of Hemianopia Patients.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous research has shown an age-related decline in Useful Field of View (UFOV) test performance, which measures the duration required to extract relevant information from a scene in three subtasks. However, these results are mostly based on data that may have been confounded by (age-related) ocular diseases. We examined UFOV performance in subjects aged 19.5 to 70.3 years to investigate how UFOV performance changes throughout adulthood. All subjects underwent a thorough ophthalmological examination to exclude ocular disorders. We also examined some elementary visual functions, i.e., near and far visual acuity, crowding and contrast sensitivity. We investigated whether these functions were related to age and whether they could explain a possible age-related decline in UFOV performance. The subjects (n = 41) performed very well on almost every measure and reached far better UFOV and visual acuity scores than those reported by other studies that relied on self-reported absence of ocular pathology. We did not find significant relationships between age and any of the elementary visual functions or the first two UFOV subtasks (R2UFOV1 = 0.03, p = 0.25; R2UFOV2 = 0.07, p = 0.10). However, we found an age-related decline in performance on the third UFOV subtask (R2UFOV3 = 0.36, p < 0.001), which was unrelated to performance on the elementary visual function tasks. Our results show that performance on the first two UFOV subtasks as well as central elementary visual functions may remain high in the absence of obvious ophthalmological pathology.
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.