Comparison of the performance of six stimulus paradigms in visual acuity assessment based on steady-state visual evoked potentials

Zheng, Xiaowei; Xu, Guanghua; Wu, Yifan; Wang, Yunyun; Du, Chenlin; Wu, Yongcheng; Zhang, Sicong; Han, Chengcheng

doi:10.1007/s10633-020-09768-x

Cited by 16 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The visual angle of the entire stimulus pattern was set as 4 degrees by adjusting the stimuli size and viewing distance. The eleven spatial frequencies of the vertical sinusoidal gratings were in logarithmically equidistant steps corresponding to the optotypes from 1.0 logMAR, 0.9 logMAR,…, 0.0 logMAR [9,28], resulting in the spatial frequencies as follows: 3.0, 3.8, 4.8, 6.0, 7.5, 9.5, 12.0, 15.0, 19.0, 23.8, and 30.0 cycles per degree (cpd). There were five trials in each spatial frequency step and one trial lasted 5 s with an interval of 2 s between two trials.…”

Section: B Visual Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There were five trials in each spatial frequency step and one trial lasted 5 s with an interval of 2 s between two trials. Subjects were instructed to monocularly maintain the red fixation cross at the center of the visual stimulus during the experiment [9].…”

Section: B Visual Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Visual evoked potentials (VEPs) offer an optional method to assess visual acuity objectively in people with difficulties in perception and recognition, and this technique of VEP-based visual acuity assessment has been studied for about 40 years [6][7][8]. Recently, the steady-state VEPs (SSVEPs), combining the characteristics of quickness and high fault tolerance, have become the most widely used technique for objective visual acuity measurement [9][10][11]. By sweeping the spatial frequency of the visual stimulus, the SSVEP acuity is correlated to the maximum observable spatial frequency of stimulus with a significant SSVEP response.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The commonly used techniques of SSVEP acuity contain several parts of the visual stimulus and its sequencing, the SSVEP acquisition and analysis, and the SSVEP acuity threshold determination [8,12]. Previous studies have explored the effects of different parameters of visual stimuli, such as the temporal frequency [13], luminance [14], contrast [15], stimulus pattern [9,16], spatial frequency properties, and some sweep parameters [13,17,18], and recommended their relevant parameter settings [8,12,19]. The acquired SSVEPs are usually analyzed in the frequency-domain by discrete Fourier transform (DFT).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Threshold Determination Criterion in Steady-State Visual Evoked Potential-Based Acuity Assessment: A Comparison of Four Common Methods

Zheng

Yan

et al. 2020

IEEE Access

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The steady-state visual evoked potential (SSVEP) visual acuity is usually defined by extrapolating a straight line regressed through significant SSVEP amplitudes plotted versus spatial frequencies to 0 µV or a noise level floor, or the finest spatial frequency evoking a significant SSVEP. This study aimed to compare the performance of the commonly used threshold determination criteria of the extrapolation technique and the finest spatial frequency technique. Visual acuity was measured both by the Freiburg Visual Acuity Test (FrACT) and SSVEP with vertical sinusoidal reversal gratings in ten adults. The extrapolation technique including three methods of linear extrapolation to zero (C1), linear extrapolation to noise level baseline (C2) and linear extrapolation to zero versus log spatial frequency (C3), and the finest spatial frequency technique with significance determination by canonical correlation analysis (CCA) and "OR" operation (C4) were used to determine the SSVEP visual acuity. Bland-Altman method found a pretty good agreement between the SSVEP and FrACT acuity obtained by all the four threshold estimation criteria. One-way repeated-measures ANOVA and Bonferroni post-hoc analysis found that there was no significant difference among visual acuities measured by FrACT and all the four criteria, except for the visual acuity estimated by C1 slightly higher than that of C2, demonstrating that these visual acuity estimating methods had a similar performance in evaluating the visual function. The correlation and agreement between subjective FrACT acuity and objective SSVEP acuity measured by four criteria respectively were all pretty good, demonstrating that all of these four threshold estimation criteria had a good performance in SSVEP visual acuity assessment.

show abstract

Section: B Visual Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: B Visual Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Threshold Determination Criterion in Steady-State Visual Evoked Potential-Based Acuity Assessment: A Comparison of Four Common Methods

Zheng

Yan

et al. 2020

IEEE Access

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The SSMVEP can also be utilized for vision testing; in 2020, Zheng et al compared six motion visual stimuli—oscilating expansion-contraction of concentric rings, reversal checkerboard, reverse vertical square-wave gratings, reversal horizontal and vertical sinusoidal gratings, and brief-onset vertical sinusoidal gratings—for objective visual acuity assestment [ 23 ]. The authors found differences in the harmonic component of the motion-based SSVEP response.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Modern Highly Interactive Flicker-Free Steady State Motion Visual Evoked Potentials for Practical Brain–Computer Interfaces

Stawicki

Volosyak

2020

Brain Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motion-based visual evoked potentials (mVEP) is a new emerging trend in the field of steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEP)-based brain–computer interfaces (BCI). In this paper, we introduce different movement-based stimulus patterns (steady-state motion visual evoked potentials—SSMVEP), without employing the typical flickering. The tested movement patterns for the visual stimuli included a pendulum-like movement, a flipping illusion, a checkerboard pulsation, checkerboard inverse arc pulsations, and reverse arc rotations, all with a spelling task consisting of 18 trials. In an online experiment with nine participants, the movement-based BCI systems were evaluated with an online four-target BCI-speller, in which each letter may be selected in three steps (three trials). For classification, the minimum energy combination and a filter bank approach were used. The following frequencies were utilized: 7.06 Hz, 7.50 Hz, 8.00 Hz, and 8.57 Hz, reaching an average accuracy between 97.22% and 100% and an average information transfer rate (ITR) between 15.42 bits/min and 33.92 bits/min. All participants successfully used the SSMVEP-based speller with all types of stimulation pattern. The most successful SSMVEP stimulus was the SSMVEP1 (pendulum-like movement), with the average results reaching 100% accuracy and 33.92 bits/min for the ITR.

show abstract

Quantitative and objective diagnosis of color vision deficiencies based on steady-state visual evoked potentials

Zheng

Wang

et al. 2020

Int Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison of the performance of six stimulus paradigms in visual acuity assessment based on steady-state visual evoked potentials

Cited by 16 publications

References 27 publications

Threshold Determination Criterion in Steady-State Visual Evoked Potential-Based Acuity Assessment: A Comparison of Four Common Methods

Threshold Determination Criterion in Steady-State Visual Evoked Potential-Based Acuity Assessment: A Comparison of Four Common Methods

Comparison of Modern Highly Interactive Flicker-Free Steady State Motion Visual Evoked Potentials for Practical Brain–Computer Interfaces

Quantitative and objective diagnosis of color vision deficiencies based on steady-state visual evoked potentials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About