Observational studyOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2020
Reading with central vision loss: binocular summation and inhibition.
Observational study in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interocular Differences in Visual Acuity and Refractive Status Between Unilateral Early and Late Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Binocular Summation in Healthy Presbyopic Adults: Contrast Sensitivity and Defocus Curves.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- The Relationship Between Vision and Performance in Swimming Under Simulated Vision Impairment: Establishing an Empirically Driven Minimum Impairment Criteria for Para Swimming.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2026Article
- The impact of amblyopia, reduced viewing conditions and binocular vision on reading ability: a narrative review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Significant Age-Related Visual Declines but Preserved Binocular Summation of Contrast Sensitivity and Visual Acuity Across Adulthood.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Biofeedback rehabilitation in patients with binocular inhibition due to macular disease.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Binocular metamorphopsia in patients with branch retinal vein occlusion: a multi-center study.International ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Visual function and biofeedback training of patients with central vision loss: a review.International journal of ophthalmology · 2023Review
- Binocularity Principles of PRL Development in Patients With Macular Disease.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2022Article
- Binocular visual function and fixational control in patients with macular disease: A review.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2022Review
- Reading with central vision loss: binocular summation and inhibition.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThere are conflicting reports as to whether there is a binocular advantage or disadvantage when reading with central vision loss. This study examined binocular reading summation in patients with macular degeneration.
methodsSeventy-one patients with bilateral central vision loss [mean age: 63 (S.D. = 21) years] participated. Reading performances during binocular and monocular viewing with the better eye (i.e., the eye with the best monocular visual acuity) were evaluated using different versions of the Italian MNREAD reading chart (www.precision-vision.com). Fixation stability and preferred retinal loci (PRLs) were recorded monocularly for each eye. The overall sample was split into inhibition, equality, and summation groups based on the binocular ratio (i.e., binocular/monocular) of the maximum reading speed.
results41% of patients experienced binocular inhibition, 42% summation, and 17% equality. Binocular reading speed of the inhibition group was approximately 30 words per minute slower than those of the equality and summation groups, although the inhibition group had the best visual acuity. These patients generally had monocular PRLs in non-corresponding locations temporal or nasal to the scotoma, had the largest interocular acuity difference and lacked residual stereopsis. The three groups did not differ in fixational control, contrast sensitivity or critical print size.
conclusionsEqual proportions of patients with central vision loss show binocular reading summation and inhibition. Patients with binocular reading inhibition have poorer reading performance and different clinical characteristics than those with binocular reading summation and equality.
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.