Determination of scotopic and photopic conventional visual acuity and hyperacuity

Freundlieb, P H; Herbik, Anne; Kramer, Frederik; Bach, Michael; Hoffmann, Michael B.

doi:10.1007/s00417-019-04505-w

Cited by 10 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A few correlations reached statistical significance, albeit without a clear pattern. In particular, the lack of a significant correlation between scotopic and photopic performance for presentation durations of 1 s, 3 s, and 10 s agrees well with the non-significant correlation found by Freundlieb et al [ 43 ] (see their supplementary figure) for self-paced tests. Bartholomew et al [ 19 ] reported a significant correlation.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…However, it is of a similar order of magnitude as the difference found by Shlaer [42], König [23], and Roelofs and Zeeman [25]. It also agrees well with recent data by Freundlieb et al [43]. A large part of the resolution difference between scotopic and photopic vision is commonly attributed to post-receptor spatial integration [44].…”

Section: General Difference Between Scotopic and Photopic Acuitysupporting

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The “speed” of acuity in scotopic vs. photopic vision

Heinrich

Blechenberg

Reichel

et al. 2020

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The effect of duration of optotype presentation on visual acuity measures has been extensively studied under photopic conditions. However, systematic data on duration dependence of acuity values under mesopic and scotopic conditions is scarce, despite being highly relevant for many visual tasks including night driving, and for clinical diagnostic applications. The present study aims to address this void. Methods We measured Landolt C acuity under photopic (90 cd/m 2), mesopic (0.7 cd/m 2), and scotopic (0.009 cd/m 2) conditions for several optotype presentation durations ranging from 0.1 to 10 s using the Freiburg Acuity and Contrast Test. Two age groups were tested (young, 18-29 years, and older, 61-74 years). Results As expected, under all luminance conditions, better acuity values were found for longer presentation durations. Photopic acuity in young participants decreased by about 0.25 log units from 0.1 to 10 s; mesopic vision mimicked the photopic visual behavior. Scotopic acuities depended more strongly on presentation duration (difference > 0.78 log units) than photopic values. There was no consistent pattern of correlation between luminance conditions across participants. We found a qualitative similarity between younger and older participants, despite higher variability among the latter and differences in absolute acuity: Photopic acuity difference (0.1 vs. 10 s) for the older participants was 0.19 log units, and scotopic difference was > 0.62 log units. Conclusion Scotopic acuity is more susceptible to changes in stimulus duration than photopic vision, with considerable interindividual variability. The latter may reflect differences in aging and sub-clinical pathophysiological processes and might have consequences for visual performance during nocturnal activities such as driving at night. Acuity testing with briefly presented scotopic stimuli might increase the usefulness of acuity assessment for tracking of the health state of the visual system.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: General Difference Between Scotopic and Photopic Acuitysupporting

confidence: 91%

The “speed” of acuity in scotopic vs. photopic vision

Heinrich

Blechenberg

Reichel

et al. 2020

Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…10,11 Hyperacuity has potential limitations for near viewing given that many past experiments have been conducted at viewing distances of 1-13m. [31][32][33][34] Thus it is unclear whether threshold performance will transfer to the 33-40cm viewing distance required for smart devices at near. Furthermore, the relationship of hyperacuity loss to AMD pathology is unclear.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Short-Term Compliance and Concordance to in Clinic Testing for Tablet-Based Home Monitoring in Age-Related Macular Degeneration

Prea

Kong

Guymer

et al. 2022

American Journal of Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While clinical practice may lean towards measuring visual function in photopic conditions, interestingly, US FDA assessments of presbyopia treatments may include evaluation under more challenging mesopic conditions. Thus, visual function in low luminance (mesopic—10–11 lux) (Image 1 ) conditions should be examined along with visual function in high luminance (photopic—> 255 lux [ 34 ]) (Image 2 ) conditions. Standardizing the illumination level in the exam room is possible using basic smartphone applications such as the Lux Light Meter Pro, which measure the lumens in the room.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classification of Presbyopia by Severity

McDonald

Barnett

Gaddie³

et al. 2021

Ophthalmol Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are close to two billion individuals globally living with presbyopia. In spite of its ubiquitous and progressive nature, there is no widely accepted, formal guideline or consensus statement on the classification of presbyopia by degree of severity. A panel of leading eye care professionals representing both optometrists and ophthalmologists convened virtually to discuss and document their combined assessments from the body of literature and clinical practice expertise in this commentary. In light of emerging therapies, classifying presbyopia by mild, moderate, or advanced severity may help provide consistency of diagnosis among eye care providers and may aid in managing patient expectations with different treatment options.

show abstract

Determination of scotopic and photopic conventional visual acuity and hyperacuity

Cited by 10 publications

References 41 publications

The “speed” of acuity in scotopic vs. photopic vision

The “speed” of acuity in scotopic vs. photopic vision

The Short-Term Compliance and Concordance to in Clinic Testing for Tablet-Based Home Monitoring in Age-Related Macular Degeneration

Classification of Presbyopia by Severity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About