ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022
Evaluation of the Relationship Between Aniseikonia and Stereopsis Using a New Method.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stereopsis impairment and its association with fovea-disc angle in congenital superior oblique palsy patients with compensatory head posture: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Exploring the Impact of Refractive and Ocular Residual Astigmatism on Stereopsis After Photorefractive Keratectomy in Patients With Myopic Astigmatism.Journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating the relationship between induced aniseikonia and distance stereopsis.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the influence of induced aniseikonia on stereopsis measured by contour-based and random-dot-based stereograms using a new method. Methods: Unlike previous studies in which aniseikonia was induced using magnifiers, which potentially influenced the position of the test symbols in the half-view, here the image was magnified while maintaining each test symbol's central position within the half-view. A phoropter and two 4K smartphones were used to measure stereopsis in seventeen young adults aged 20-28 years old. Stereopsis was tested using both contour-based and random-dot-based stereograms under overall or meridional aniseikonia with magnifications ranging from 2.5 to 30%. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to evaluate the effect of aniseikonia on stereopsis. Results: Stereopsis decreased with an increase in aniseikonia magnification in the overall, horizontal, and vertical directions. Stereopsis values (log arcsec) increased from 1.29 ± 0.14 at baseline to 2.38 ± 0.16 with 30% overall aniseikonia of contour-based stereograms. In random-dot based stereograms, stereopsis values increased from 1.29 ± 0.16 at baseline to 2.24 ± 0.23 with 22.5% overall aniseikonia. Overall aniseikonia caused a significantly greater impairment on stereopsis as compared with the changes in meridional directions. In contour-based stereograms, vertical aniseikonia had significantly less impact on stereopsis than horizontal aniseikonia of identical magnification. The opposite phenomenon was found in random-dot-based stereograms. Conclusion: Stereopsis decreased with an increase of magnification of induced aniseikonia. Magnifying patterns (overall, horizontal, or vertical) also significantly affected stereopsis. The conflicting impact of meridional aniseikonia on stereopsis measured by contour-based and random-dot-based stereograms may be associated with the uniqueness of the two test systems.
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.