The purpose of this study was to develop a method for obtaining simultaneous electrophysiological and functional magnetic resonance imaging data. Using phantom experiments and tests on several of the investigators, a method for obtaining simultaneous electrophysiological and fMRI data was developed and then tested in three volunteers including two task activation experiments. It was then applied in a sleep experiment (n = 12). Current limiting resistance and low-pass filtering were added to the electrophysiological circuit. Potential high frequency current loops were avoided in the electrical layout near the subject. MRI was performed at 1.5 T using conventional and echo planar imaging sequences. There was no evidence of subject injury. Expected correlations were observed between the electrophysiological and fMIU data in the task activation experiments. The fMRI data were not sigruficantly degraded by the electrophysiological apparatus. Alpha waves were detected from within the magnet in seven of the 15 experimental sessions. There was degradation of the electrophysiological data due to ballistocardiographic artifacts (pulsatile whole body motion time-locked to cardiac activity) which vaned between subjects from being minimal to becoming large enough to make detection of alpha waves difficult. We concluded that simultaneous fMRI and electrophysiological recording is possible with minor modifications of standard electrophysiological equipment. Our initial results suggest this can be done safely and without compromise of the fMRI data. The usefulness of this technique for studies of such things as sleep and epilepsy is promising. Applications requiring higher precision electrophysiological data, such as evoked response measurements, may require modifications based on ballistocardiographic effects. Address reprint requests to Bruce R. Rosen, M.D., Ph.D., Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, MGH-NMR Within the last few years, several magnetic resowhich are sensitive to local changes in cerebral hemo-nance imaging (MRI) techniques have been developed Center,

SIGNIFICANCE Accommodation/convergence mismatch induced by 3D displays can cause discomfort symptoms such as those induced by accommodation/convergence mismatch in clinical vergence testing. We found that the limits of clear and single vision during vergence tests are very different between 3D and clinical tests. Clinical vergences should not be used as substitutes for measures of vergences in 3D displays. PURPOSE The purposes of this study were to determine whether the limits of clear and single binocular vision derived from phoropter prism vergence tests match the limits measured in a 3D display and to determine whether vergence mode, smooth versus jump, affected those limits in the 3D display. METHODS We tested the phoropter prism vergence limits of clear and single vision at 40 cm in 47 binocular young adults. In separate sessions, we tested, in a 3D display, the analogous 40-cm vergence limits for smooth vergence and jump vergence. The 3D fixation target was a Maltese cross whose visual angle changed congruently with target disparity. RESULTS Our mean phoropter vergence blur and break values were similar to those reported in previous studies. The mean smooth divergence limit was less in the 3D display (9.8Δ) than in the phoropter (12.8Δ). Most smooth convergence limits were much larger in the 3D display than in the phoropter, reaching the 35Δ limit of the 3D display without blur or diplopia in 24 subjects. Mean jump vergence limits were significantly smaller than smooth vergence limits in the 3D display. CONCLUSIONS The limits of clear and single binocular vision derived from phoropter vergence tests were not a good approximation of the analogous limits in our 3D display.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract