ライフサイエンスコーパス: stereoacuity

1 ty, contrast sensitivity, visual fields, and stereoacuity.

2 Deferring treatment did not affect final stereoacuity.

3 amblyopia is believed to result in improved stereoacuity.

4 fluenced the maturation of visual acuity and stereoacuity.

5 ntervals of the worse eye's near VA based on stereoacuity.

6 % of participants also showed improvement in stereoacuity.

7 ith unilateral amblyopia, mean IAD, and mean stereoacuity.

8 unilateral amblyopia, larger IAD, and worse stereoacuity.

9 arcsec (95% CI, -0.06 to 0.08) for distance stereoacuity.

10 arcsec (95% CI, -0.01 to 0.09) for distance stereoacuity.

11 ded visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and stereoacuity.

12 tegies to maximize development of high-grade stereoacuity.

13 rt lines) and both also regained significant stereoacuity.

14 of age, presence of amblyopia, and abnormal stereoacuity.

15 n IAD (0.07 vs. 0.05 logMAR), and worse mean stereoacuity (145 vs. 117 arc sec; all P<0.0001).

16 ast acuity (LCA, 2.5% and 1.25%), and Randot stereoacuity 2 months following surgical correction of s

17 lar near VA (20/40 or worse) or reduced near stereoacuity (240 seconds of arc or worse) in 4- and 5-y

18 l visual acuity (20/20 or better) and normal stereoacuity (40s of arc or better).

19 h an overall significant mean improvement in stereoacuity after training (t((1)(3)) =2.64; P = 0.02).

20 log arcsec (95% CI, -0.01 to 0.06) for near stereoacuity and 0.01 log arcsec (95% CI, -0.06 to 0.08)

21 dence interval [CI], -0.02 to 0.06) for near stereoacuity and 0.04 log arcsec (95% CI, -0.01 to 0.09)

22 spondence between the mVEP response and both stereoacuity and bifoveal fusion in a cohort of strabism

23 Although VA, stereoacuity and binocular rivalry at low spatial freque

24 Near stereoacuity and BiS for 2.5% and 1.25% LCA were signifi

25 f decorrelated visual experience may improve stereoacuity and decrease fixation instability.

26 ed discordance between the mVEP response and stereoacuity and high concordance between the mVEP respo

27 to evaluate the relationship between Titmus stereoacuity and minimal VA based on a real-world testin

28 high concordance between mVEP responses and stereoacuity and mVEP responses and bifoveal fusion.

29 Abnormal stereoacuity and occlusion therapy pose significant risk

30 We found near stereoacuity and pAE dominance in binocular rivalry in "

31 re accurately predict minimum VA from Titmus stereoacuity and should be used preferentially when eval

32 Secondary outcomes were change in stereoacuity and suppression at the 2-week visit and cha

33 t sensitivity with and without glare, Randot stereoacuity, and 60 degrees Humphrey visual fields.

34 ures: prism and alternate cover test (PACT), stereoacuity, and control score (mean of the 3 most rece

35 with increased fixation instability, poorer stereoacuity, and more severe amblyopia.

36 elated moderately with contrast sensitivity, stereoacuity, and visual fields (Spearman rho = 0.50, 0.

37 sual acuity, contrast and glare sensitivity, stereoacuity, and visual fields are significant independ

38 w luminance, contrast and glare sensitivity, stereoacuity, and visual fields were measured.

39 ce, contrast sensitivity, glare sensitivity, stereoacuity, and visual fields.

40 ants had lower contrast sensitivity, reduced stereoacuity, and worse visual fields, at all ages compa

41 , motor angle deviation at near, fusion, and stereoacuity as recorded on the most recent visit during

42 6, and 52 wk of age and significantly poorer stereoacuity at 17 wk of age than did infants who were w

43 Better acuity and stereoacuity at 17 wk was correlated with higher concent

44 The objective of this study was to compare stereoacuity at age 3.5 y in healthy, full-term children

45 Stereoacuity at age 3.5 y was assessed.

46 t be excluded, but the lack of difference in stereoacuity between infants randomly assigned to DHA-co

47 For individual patients, deterioration in stereoacuity beyond previously reported test-retest vari

48 Random dot stereoacuity, blood lipid profile, growth, and tolerance

49 term monocular conditions (those with normal stereoacuity but occluded) with nil stereoacuity showed

50 We demonstrated that Titmus stereoacuity cannot definitively establish normal VA, an

51 Mean stereoacuity changed from a value of 263.3 +/- 135.1 bef

52 angle of resolution [logMAR] visual acuity, stereoacuity, contrast sensitivity, and forward light sc

53 ic assessment (best-corrected visual acuity, stereoacuity, cycloplegic refraction and funduscopy).

54 aneous prism and cover test, and/or (2) near stereoacuity decreased by at least 2 octaves from baseli

55 Patients with stereoacuity demonstrated significantly more BiS in 2.5%

56 Stereoacuity did not differ significantly between childr

57 cuity testing, and therefore measurements of stereoacuity do not need to precede visual acuity measur

58 led to equal decrements in visual acuity and stereoacuity for the +1.00 and -1.00 DS and the +2.00 an

59 easures, the performance was best in the nil stereoacuity group and was statistically significant for

60 ad tasks were significantly worse in the nil stereoacuity group when compared with that of the normal

61 group when compared with that of the normal stereoacuity group.

62 es as initial treatment and who had abnormal stereoacuity had 3.4x (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8

63 anagement; however, the functional impact of stereoacuity has largely been neglected.

64 tly (P = 0.001) greater likelihood of foveal stereoacuity (high-grade or < 100 s/arc) than did formul

65 In this group, stereoacuity improved to a normal level as a result of r

66 Stereoacuity in the LCP-supplemented group was significa

67 Reduced stereoacuity is commonly found in association with reduc

68 Age-related deterioration in stereoacuity is reflected not only by a linear correlati

69 Chicago, IL] results were used to determine stereoacuity levels).

70 of which test result was used to define the stereoacuity levels.

71 Infant stereoacuity matured from unmeasurable at age 12 weeks t

72 uro-ophthalmic examination, including Titmus stereoacuity measurements.

73 tween two stimuli by itself predicts neither stereoacuity nor perceived depth.

74 f monocular near and distance visual acuity, stereoacuity, ocular alignment, motility, pupils, and ex

75 = 0.04 for Definitional Vocabulary) or near stereoacuity of 240 seconds of arc or worse (-8.6, P < 0

76 between the groups for the proportions with stereoacuity of 3000 s of arc or worse was 58% (47-69%).

77 cept for refractive correction) IXT and near stereoacuity of 400 seconds of arc or better were enroll

78 was undertaken to investigate the effect on stereoacuity of treatment for unilateral visual impairme

79 strabismus and 47 controls) with measurable stereoacuity on their initial stereoacuity test were enr

80 ere was no overall deterioration in distance stereoacuity or near stereoacuity thresholds in either t

81 previous commonly used VA estimates based on stereoacuity overestimated VA.

82 ween BiS for 2.5% LCA with near and distance stereoacuity (P = .006 and P = .009).

83 was also significantly correlated with near stereoacuity (P = .04).

84 unilateral amblyopia, larger IAD, and worse stereoacuity (P<0.001 for trend).

85 Age significantly affected stereoacuity performance at recruitment (mean age, 4 yea

86 10 to 30 years with normal, reduced, or nil stereoacuity performed three tasks: Purdue pegboard (mea

87 d to stereoacuity, with subjects with normal stereoacuity performing best on all tests.

88 nd/or anisometropia, and the associated poor stereoacuity probably is the consequence of decorrelated

89 Visual acuity, stereoacuity, refraction, clinical findings of slit-lamp

90 Stereoacuity remained constant into the mid-70s and decl

91 m of neuro-ophthalmic diseases affecting VA, stereoacuity remains associated with VA, but previous co

92 ters than did those without near or distance stereoacuity, respectively.

93 Comparison of stereoacuities showed an immediate median improvement of

94 h normal stereoacuity but occluded) with nil stereoacuity showed that, on all measures, the performan

95 ve percent had functional stereo vision with stereoacuity similar to that of 12 age-matched controls

96 Best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and stereoacuity (Stereo Randot graded circle test) changes

97 ntrol score, near PACT, and Randot Preschool stereoacuity (Stereoptical Co, Inc, Chicago, IL) were as

98 nil stereoacuity (when the Preschool Randot Stereoacuity Test [Stereo Optical Co, Inc., Chicago, IL]

99 ith measurable stereoacuity on their initial stereoacuity test were enrolled prospectively.

100 ts), and best corrected SA (Randot Preschool Stereoacuity Test) were measured in 4- to 13-year-old To

101 nd the depth perception test using the Langs stereoacuity test.

102 , including monocular visual acuity testing, stereoacuity testing, and cycloplegic refraction.

103 ugh visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and stereoacuity tests.

104 ths did not demonstrate significantly poorer stereoacuity than those in treatment.

105 Stereoacuity thresholds do not deteriorate after visual

106 terioration in distance stereoacuity or near stereoacuity thresholds in either the intermittent strab

107 Five patients were found to have improved stereoacuity to 60 arc seconds or better by the end of t

108 res were change in clinical outcomes (angle, stereoacuity, visual acuity and NCS) in treated and untr

109 Data collected included angle, near stereoacuity, visual acuity, control of X(T) measured wi

110 binocular sensory function study, random-dot stereoacuity was abnormal in 41% of children, whereas an

111 Random dot stereoacuity was assessed in infants with forced-choice

112 Titmus stereoacuity was associated positively with VA: 9 circle

113 Median near stereoacuity was better in emmetropic than in than hyper

114 Stereoacuity was better in the expedited surgery group,

115 Variation in stereoacuity was examined in a large group of observers

116 Stereoacuity was measured before and immediately after v

117 Stereoacuity was measured by using the random dot E test

118 Random dot stereoacuity was measured in 152 children with a history

119 relationship between binocular summation and stereoacuity was studied by Spearman correlation.

120 Stereoacuity was transformed to log units for analysis.

121 The change in stereoacuity was used as a surrogate measure of function

122 The microstrabismic subjects' stereoacuities were substantially reduced, but their dis

123 f the minimum angle of resolution VA and log stereoacuity were analyzed.

124 om-dot (Randot; Stereo Optical, Chicago, IL) stereoacuity were assessed at recruitment and at 12- and

125 rge and small bead tasks, those with reduced stereoacuity were better than those with nil stereoacuit

126 ith unilateral amblyopia, mean IAD, and mean stereoacuity were compared between anisometropic and iso

127 r detection thresholds, optotype acuity, and stereoacuity were measured in a group of 19 newly diagno

128 dative response, binocular near VA, and near stereoacuity were measured.

129 functions such as habitual visual acuity and stereoacuity were not affected by drug exposure.

130 Acuity, contrast sensitivity, and stereoacuity were not associated with crashes.

131 Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and stereoacuity were not associated with falls after adjust

132 The median angle of deviation and median stereoacuity were not significantly different at 6 or 18

133 VA, accommodative response, and stereoacuity were significantly reduced in moderate unco

134 ity, contrast sensitivity, visual field, and stereoacuity were tested by using standard measures.

135 of MFS patients developed a higher grade of stereoacuity when followed for a sufficient interval of

136 stereoacuity were better than those with nil stereoacuity (when the Preschool Randot Stereoacuity Tes

137 before dichoptic treatment had unmeasurable stereoacuity while this only occurred in 2 patients (11.

138 ormance on motor skills tasks was related to stereoacuity, with subjects with normal stereoacuity per

139 9 and 25% of the observers aged 70 to 79 had stereoacuity within the normal range.