Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Three clinical tests of the spatial contrast sensitivity function: a comparison.

T R Corwin, J E Richman

    American Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics
    |June 1, 1986
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    The determinants of perceived brightness are complicated, but not hopelessly so.

    The Behavioral and brain sciences·2014
    Same author

    Synthesis of polyazamacrocyclic compounds via modified Richman-Atkins cyclization of beta-trimethylsilylethanesulfonamides.

    The Journal of organic chemistry·2001
    Same author

    Fixation dysfunction with intermittent saccadic intrusions managed by yoked prisms: a case report.

    Optometry (St. Louis, Mo.)·2000
    Same author

    A forced choice procedure for evaluation of contrast sensitivity function in preschool children.

    Journal of the American Optometric Association·1994
    Same author

    Eye movement dysfunction vs. language delays in migrant children.

    Journal of the American Optometric Association·1994
    Same author

    Stereopsis testing without polarized glasses: a comparison study on five new stereoacuity tests.

    Journal of the American Optometric Association·1994

    This study compared three clinical tests for measuring spatial contrast sensitivity function (CSF). While similar at high frequencies, the AO plates showed higher sensitivity than Vistech and Optronics at low frequencies, likely due to area truncation.

    Area of Science:

    • Ophthalmology
    • Vision Science
    • Optometry

    Background:

    • Spatial contrast sensitivity function (CSF) is crucial for visual performance.
    • Standardized clinical tests are needed for accurate CSF measurement.
    • Existing tests may exhibit discrepancies, particularly at low spatial frequencies.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To compare the performance of three clinical tests for measuring spatial contrast sensitivity function (CSF).
    • To establish a practical basis for comparing the AO contrast sensitivity test plates, Vistech VCTS 6500 chart, and Nicolet CS-2000 system.
    • To identify potential discrepancies in CSF measurements across different testing methodologies.

    Main Methods:

    • Administered three clinical CSF tests (AO plates, Vistech VCTS 6500, Nicolet CS-2000) to 71 normal observers under standard conditions.

    Related Experiment Videos

  • Converted test scores to absolute contrast and spatial frequency units for direct comparison.
  • Employed a randomized subset of participants for robust data collection.

    • Main Results:

    • All three tests demonstrated similar spatial contrast sensitivity function (CSF) measurements at intermediate and high spatial frequencies.
    • At low spatial frequencies, the Vistech and Optronics systems yielded significantly lower sensitivity scores compared to the AO plates.
    • A notable discrepancy was observed at low spatial frequencies, suggesting test-specific variations.

    Conclusions:

    • The AO contrast sensitivity test plates, Vistech VCTS 6500, and Nicolet CS-2000 show comparable results at higher spatial frequencies.
    • Differences in low spatial frequency measurements between the AO plates and the Vistech/Optronics systems are likely attributable to area truncation effects.
    • Clinical implications suggest careful consideration of test methodology when assessing spatial contrast sensitivity, especially at low frequencies.