ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2018
Differences in Static and Kinetic Perimetry Results are Eliminated in Retinal Disease when Psychophysical Procedures are Equated.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- National Consensus on the Assessment of Visual Function for Driving in Switzerland.Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde · 2025Article
- Functional characteristics of glaucoma related arcuate defects seen on OCT en face visualisation of the retinal nerve fibre layer.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2021Article
- Validation of a novel functional test for assessing metamorphopsia using epiretinal membranes as a model.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Optimising the Structure-Function Relationship at the Locus of Deficit in Retinal Disease.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe tested the hypothesis that clinical statokinetic dissociation (SKD, defined as the difference in sensitivity to static and kinetic stimuli) at the scotoma border in retinal disease is due to individual criterion bias and that SKD can be eliminated by equating the psychophysical procedures for testing static and kinetic stimulus detection.
methodsSix subjects with glaucoma and six with retinitis pigmentosa (RP) were tested. Clinical procedures (standard automated perimetry [SAP] and manual kinetic perimetry [MKP]) were used to determine clinical SKD and the region of interest for laboratory-based testing. Two-way Method of Limits (MoL) was used to establish the isocontrast region at the scotoma border in glaucoma and RP subjects. Method of Constant Stimuli (MoCS) and a two-interval forced choice (2IFC) procedure then were used to present static or kinetic (inward or outward) stimuli at different eccentricities within the isocontrast region. The results were fitted with psychometric functions to determine threshold eccentricities.
resultsClinical SKD was found in glaucoma and RP subjects, with variable magnitude among subjects, but significantly exceeding expected typical measurement variability. The resultant psychometric functions when using MoCS and 2IFC showed equal sensitivity to static and kinetic targets, thus eliminating SKD.
conclusionsClinical SKD found using clinical techniques is due to methodologic differences and criterion bias, and is eliminated by using an equated and more objective psychophysical task, similar to normal subjects. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: Eliminating SKD using a psychophysical approach minimizing criterion bias suggests that it is not useful to distinguish between normal and diseased fields.
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.