ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2022
The Effect of Induced Intraocular Stray Light on Recognition Thresholds for Pseudo-High-Pass Filtered Letters.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The Moorfields Acuity Chart (MAC)-comprising pseudo-high-pass filtered "vanishing optotype" (VO) letters-is more sensitive to functional visual loss in age-related macular degeneration (AMD) compared to conventional letter charts. It is currently unknown the degree to which MAC acuity is affected by optical factors such as cataract. This is important to know when determining whether an individual's vision loss owes more to neural or optical factors. Here we estimate recognition acuity for VOs and conventional letters with simulated lens aging, achieved using different levels of induced intraocular light scatter. Methods: Recognition thresholds were determined for two experienced and one naive participant with conventional and VO letters. Stimuli were presented either foveally or at 10 degrees in the horizontal temporal retina, under varying degrees of intraocular light scatter induced by white resin opacity-containing filters (WOFs grades 1 to 5). Results: Foveal acuity only became significantly different from baseline (no filter) for WOF grade 5 with conventional letters and WOF grades 4 and 5 with VOs. In the periphery, no statistical difference was found for any stray-light level for both conventional and VOs. Conclusions: Recognition acuity measured with conventional and VOs is robust to the effects of simulated lens opacification, and thus its higher sensitivity to neural damage should not simultaneously be confounded by such optical factors. Translational Relevance: The MAC may be better able to differentiate between neural and optical deficits of visual performance, making it more suitable for the assessment of patients with AMD, who may display both types of functional visual loss.
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.