使用眼动仪对两种眼球运动视觉语言测试进行比较

IF 2.2 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY Journal of Optometry Pub Date : 2024-06-21 DOI:10.1016/j.optom.2024.100517
Carmen López-de-la-Fuente, Elena Saz-Onrubia, Elvira Orduna-Hospital, Ana Sánchez-Cano
{"title":"使用眼动仪对两种眼球运动视觉语言测试进行比较","authors":"Carmen López-de-la-Fuente,&nbsp;Elena Saz-Onrubia,&nbsp;Elvira Orduna-Hospital,&nbsp;Ana Sánchez-Cano","doi":"10.1016/j.optom.2024.100517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>This study aims to compare eye movements monitored with an eye tracker during two visuo-verbal tests for assessing ocular motility. The study explores the potential of digital assessment and eye tracking technology in enhancing the understanding of ocular motility during these tests.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>47 healthy participants were included (20 males, 27 females), with a mean age of 21.34±1.77 years. The participants underwent optometric examinations to ensure visual health and exclude any dysfunctions or pathologies. The experimental protocol involved the digitized versions of the DEM and King-Devick tests, monitored with an eye tracker.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The vertical subtests of DEM test showed fewer saccades, longer fixation durations, smaller saccade amplitudes, and slower saccade speeds compared to the horizontal subtest. The King-Devick test exhibited comparable fixation and saccade numbers, while fixation duration slightly increased with test difficulty. Statistically significant differences were found between the tests, but a positive correlation was observed.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Statistically significant differences were observed between the DEM and King-Devick tests, indicating that they measure similar aspects but are not interchangeable. The DEM test offers more comprehensive information with vertical saccade assessment. Test duration correlates positively with saccade and fixation count, fixation duration, and saccade speed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Optometry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1888429624000050/pdfft?md5=56e8ab0927ccd7431201e499e9656fc9&pid=1-s2.0-S1888429624000050-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of two visual-verbal tests of ocular motility using an eye-tracker\",\"authors\":\"Carmen López-de-la-Fuente,&nbsp;Elena Saz-Onrubia,&nbsp;Elvira Orduna-Hospital,&nbsp;Ana Sánchez-Cano\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.optom.2024.100517\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>This study aims to compare eye movements monitored with an eye tracker during two visuo-verbal tests for assessing ocular motility. The study explores the potential of digital assessment and eye tracking technology in enhancing the understanding of ocular motility during these tests.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>47 healthy participants were included (20 males, 27 females), with a mean age of 21.34±1.77 years. The participants underwent optometric examinations to ensure visual health and exclude any dysfunctions or pathologies. The experimental protocol involved the digitized versions of the DEM and King-Devick tests, monitored with an eye tracker.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The vertical subtests of DEM test showed fewer saccades, longer fixation durations, smaller saccade amplitudes, and slower saccade speeds compared to the horizontal subtest. The King-Devick test exhibited comparable fixation and saccade numbers, while fixation duration slightly increased with test difficulty. Statistically significant differences were found between the tests, but a positive correlation was observed.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Statistically significant differences were observed between the DEM and King-Devick tests, indicating that they measure similar aspects but are not interchangeable. The DEM test offers more comprehensive information with vertical saccade assessment. Test duration correlates positively with saccade and fixation count, fixation duration, and saccade speed.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46407,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Optometry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1888429624000050/pdfft?md5=56e8ab0927ccd7431201e499e9656fc9&pid=1-s2.0-S1888429624000050-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Optometry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1888429624000050\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Optometry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1888429624000050","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 本研究旨在比较在两种评估眼球运动的视觉语言测试中使用眼动仪监测到的眼球运动。研究探讨了数字评估和眼动跟踪技术在提高对这些测试过程中眼球运动的理解方面的潜力。研究方法 47 名健康参与者(20 名男性,27 名女性),平均年龄(21.34±1.77)岁。参与者均接受了视力检查,以确保视力健康并排除任何功能障碍或病症。实验方案包括数字化版本的 DEM 和 King-Devick 测试,并使用眼动仪进行监测。结果与水平子测试相比,DEM 测试的垂直子测试显示出较少的囊回次数、较长的固定持续时间、较小的囊回幅度和较慢的囊回速度。King-Devick 测试的定点和囊回次数相当,而定点持续时间随着测试难度的增加而略有增加。结论 DEM 测试和 King-Devick 测试之间存在明显的统计学差异,表明它们测量的方面相似,但不能互换。DEM 测试可提供更全面的垂直囊回评估信息。测试持续时间与囊回和定点计数、定点持续时间和囊回速度呈正相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of two visual-verbal tests of ocular motility using an eye-tracker

Purpose

This study aims to compare eye movements monitored with an eye tracker during two visuo-verbal tests for assessing ocular motility. The study explores the potential of digital assessment and eye tracking technology in enhancing the understanding of ocular motility during these tests.

Methods

47 healthy participants were included (20 males, 27 females), with a mean age of 21.34±1.77 years. The participants underwent optometric examinations to ensure visual health and exclude any dysfunctions or pathologies. The experimental protocol involved the digitized versions of the DEM and King-Devick tests, monitored with an eye tracker.

Results

The vertical subtests of DEM test showed fewer saccades, longer fixation durations, smaller saccade amplitudes, and slower saccade speeds compared to the horizontal subtest. The King-Devick test exhibited comparable fixation and saccade numbers, while fixation duration slightly increased with test difficulty. Statistically significant differences were found between the tests, but a positive correlation was observed.

Conclusions

Statistically significant differences were observed between the DEM and King-Devick tests, indicating that they measure similar aspects but are not interchangeable. The DEM test offers more comprehensive information with vertical saccade assessment. Test duration correlates positively with saccade and fixation count, fixation duration, and saccade speed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Optometry
Journal of Optometry OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
60
审稿时长
66 days
期刊最新文献
Analysis of patient referrals from primary care to ophthalmology. The role of the optometrist Corneal higher-order aberrations in different types of irregular cornea Intraocular pressure and its association with ocular biometrics in Iranian children Comparison of macular thickness in diabetic patients acquired from optical coherence tomography mode and optical coherence tomography angiography mode in Cirrus HD-OCT 5000 JOptom's Web of Science (WoS) impact factor
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1