ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2022
Effects of glaucoma on detection and discrimination of image blur.
Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of glaucoma on detection and discrimination of image blur.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBlur is one of the most commonly reported visual symptoms of glaucoma, but it is not directly measured by current clinical tests. We aimed to investigate the effects of glaucoma on detection and discrimination of image blur.
methodsParticipants were people with glaucoma, separated into two groups with (n = 15) or without (n = 17) central visual field defects measured by 10-2 perimetry, and an age-similar control group (n = 18). First, we measured contrast detection thresholds centrally using a 2-interval forced choice procedure. We then measured blur detection and discrimination thresholds for the same stimuli (reference blurs 0, 1 arcmin) using a 2-alternative forced choice procedure under two contrast conditions: 4× individual detection threshold for the low contrast condition; 95% contrast for the high contrast condition. The stimulus was a horizontal edge bisecting a hard-edged circle of 4.5° diameter. Data were analysed by linear mixed modelling.
resultsContrast detection thresholds for the glaucoma group with central visual field defects were raised by 0.01 ± 0.004 (mean ± SE, Michelson units) (p = 0.002) and by 0.01 ± 0.004 (p = 0.03) relative to control and glaucoma without central visual field defect groups, respectively. Blur detection and discrimination thresholds were similar between groups, with small elevations in blur detection thresholds in the glaucoma groups not reaching statistical significance (detection p = 0.29, discrimination p = 0.91). The lower contrast level increased thresholds from the higher contrast level by 1.30 ± 0.10 arcmin (p < 0.001) and 1.05 ± 0.10 arcmin (p < 0.001) for blur detection and discrimination thresholds, respectively.
conclusionsEarly-moderate glaucoma resulted in only minimal elevations of blur detection thresholds that did not reach statistical significance in this study. Despite the prevalence of blur as a visual symptom of glaucoma, psychophysical measurements of blur detection or discrimination may not be good candidates for development as clinical tests for glaucoma.
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.