精神障碍人群的手眼优势:流行程度和方法比较。

S E Robison, S S Block, J D Boudreaux, R J Flora
{"title":"精神障碍人群的手眼优势:流行程度和方法比较。","authors":"S E Robison,&nbsp;S S Block,&nbsp;J D Boudreaux,&nbsp;R J Flora","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The primary purpose of this study was to investigate hand-eye dominance in a population with mental handicaps and how the distribution compared with the general population. In addition, this study investigated the correlation between two methods of hand-eye dominance testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two methods were used to determine eye dominance: the hole-in-the-hand method and the eye dominance wand. Hand dominance was determined by the subject's choice of accepting hand. The sample was comprised of a population of 421 athletes participating in the 1997 Special Olympic Games in Toronto. All subjects unable to give a dominant hand or unable to perform either of the ocular dominance tests were eliminated from analysis. Athletes who demonstrated strabismus or a difference in visual acuity between the two eyes of greater than 1 line were separated in the analysis, reducing the sample population to 191.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The hole-in-the-hand method of eye dominance showed that 40.3% of this population exhibited crossed dominance. The eye dominance wand found crossed dominance in 36.6% of this population. The eye dominance wand demonstrated moderate agreement with the hole-in-the-hand method; however, there was some crossover of eye dominance between tests, when the tests were compared on a case-by-case basis.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevalence rate of this population of persons with mental handicaps agrees with the prevalence rates found by Robison et al., in which 41% of a general nonhandicapped population demonstrated crossed dominance. The results suggest that persons with mental handicaps have prevalence rates of crossed dominance similar to those found in the general population.</p>","PeriodicalId":17208,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Optometric Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hand-eye dominance in a population with mental handicaps: prevalence and a comparison of methods.\",\"authors\":\"S E Robison,&nbsp;S S Block,&nbsp;J D Boudreaux,&nbsp;R J Flora\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The primary purpose of this study was to investigate hand-eye dominance in a population with mental handicaps and how the distribution compared with the general population. In addition, this study investigated the correlation between two methods of hand-eye dominance testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two methods were used to determine eye dominance: the hole-in-the-hand method and the eye dominance wand. Hand dominance was determined by the subject's choice of accepting hand. The sample was comprised of a population of 421 athletes participating in the 1997 Special Olympic Games in Toronto. All subjects unable to give a dominant hand or unable to perform either of the ocular dominance tests were eliminated from analysis. Athletes who demonstrated strabismus or a difference in visual acuity between the two eyes of greater than 1 line were separated in the analysis, reducing the sample population to 191.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The hole-in-the-hand method of eye dominance showed that 40.3% of this population exhibited crossed dominance. The eye dominance wand found crossed dominance in 36.6% of this population. The eye dominance wand demonstrated moderate agreement with the hole-in-the-hand method; however, there was some crossover of eye dominance between tests, when the tests were compared on a case-by-case basis.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The prevalence rate of this population of persons with mental handicaps agrees with the prevalence rates found by Robison et al., in which 41% of a general nonhandicapped population demonstrated crossed dominance. The results suggest that persons with mental handicaps have prevalence rates of crossed dominance similar to those found in the general population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17208,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Optometric Association\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Optometric Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Optometric Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究的主要目的是调查智力障碍人群的手眼优势及其与一般人群的分布情况。此外,本研究还探讨了两种手眼优势测验方法的相关性。方法:采用手孔法和眼优势棒法测定眼球优势度。手优势是由被试接受手的选择决定的。样本由参加1997年多伦多特奥会的421名运动员组成。所有不能给出优势手或不能进行任何一项眼优势测试的受试者都从分析中剔除。在分析中,表现出斜视或两眼视力差异大于1线的运动员被分开,将样本人口减少到191人。结果:手孔眼优势法显示,40.3%的种群存在交叉优势。眼显性法发现36.6%的人群存在交叉显性。眼优势棒与手孔法表现出中等程度的一致性;然而,当测试在个案基础上进行比较时,在测试之间存在一些眼睛优势交叉。结论:该智障人群的患病率与Robison等人发现的患病率一致,其中41%的一般非残障人群表现出交叉显性。结果表明,智力残疾者的交叉显性患病率与一般人群相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Hand-eye dominance in a population with mental handicaps: prevalence and a comparison of methods.

Background: The primary purpose of this study was to investigate hand-eye dominance in a population with mental handicaps and how the distribution compared with the general population. In addition, this study investigated the correlation between two methods of hand-eye dominance testing.

Methods: Two methods were used to determine eye dominance: the hole-in-the-hand method and the eye dominance wand. Hand dominance was determined by the subject's choice of accepting hand. The sample was comprised of a population of 421 athletes participating in the 1997 Special Olympic Games in Toronto. All subjects unable to give a dominant hand or unable to perform either of the ocular dominance tests were eliminated from analysis. Athletes who demonstrated strabismus or a difference in visual acuity between the two eyes of greater than 1 line were separated in the analysis, reducing the sample population to 191.

Results: The hole-in-the-hand method of eye dominance showed that 40.3% of this population exhibited crossed dominance. The eye dominance wand found crossed dominance in 36.6% of this population. The eye dominance wand demonstrated moderate agreement with the hole-in-the-hand method; however, there was some crossover of eye dominance between tests, when the tests were compared on a case-by-case basis.

Conclusions: The prevalence rate of this population of persons with mental handicaps agrees with the prevalence rates found by Robison et al., in which 41% of a general nonhandicapped population demonstrated crossed dominance. The results suggest that persons with mental handicaps have prevalence rates of crossed dominance similar to those found in the general population.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Practice management. Ocular cicatricial pemphigoid. Retinal capillary hemangioma. Giant papillary conjunctivitis. Nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy.
×
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