The pattern of visual deficits in amblyopia

Suzanne P. McKee, Dennis M. Levi, J. Anthony Movshon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Amblyopia is usually defined as a deficit in optotype (Snellen) acuity with no detectable organic cause. We asked whether this visual abnormality is completely characterized by the deficit in optotype acuity, or whether it has distinct forms that are determined by the conditions associated with the acuity loss, such as strabismus or anisometropia. To decide this issue, we measured optotype acuity, Vernier acuity, grating acuity, contrast sensitivity, and binocular function in 427 adults with amblyopia or with risk factors for amblyopia and in a comparison group of 68 normal observers. Optotype acuity accounts for much of the variance in Vernier and grating acuity, and somewhat less of the variance in contrast sensitivity. Nevertheless, there are differences in the patterns of visual loss among the clinically defined categories, particularly between strabismic and anisometropic categories. We used factor analysis to create a succinct representation of our measurement space. This analysis revealed two main dimensions of variation in the visual performance of our abnormal sample, one related to the visual acuity measures (optotype, Vernier, and grating acuity) and the other related to the contrast sensitivity measures (Pelli-Robson and edge contrast sensitivity). Representing our data in this space reveals distinctive distributions of visual loss for different patient categories, and suggests that two consequences of the associated conditions - reduced resolution and loss of binocularity - determine the pattern of visual deficit. Non-binocular observers with mild-to-moderate acuity deficits have, on average, better monocular contrast sensitivity than do binocular observers with the same acuity loss. Despite their superior contrast sensitivity, non-binocular observers typically have poorer optotype acuity and Vernier acuity, at a given level of grating acuity, than those with residual binocular function.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)380-405
Number of pages26
JournalJournal of vision
Volume3
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 15 2003

Fingerprint

Contrast Sensitivity
Amblyopia
Anisometropia
Strabismus
Visual Acuity
Statistical Factor Analysis

Keywords

  • Amblyopia
  • Binocular vision
  • Contrast sensitivity
  • Spatial vision
  • Vernier acuity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

The pattern of visual deficits in amblyopia. / McKee, Suzanne P.; Levi, Dennis M.; Movshon, J. Anthony.

In: Journal of vision, Vol. 3, No. 5, 15.07.2003, p. 380-405.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

McKee, Suzanne P. ; Levi, Dennis M. ; Movshon, J. Anthony. / The pattern of visual deficits in amblyopia. In: Journal of vision. 2003 ; Vol. 3, No. 5. pp. 380-405.
@article{e804cb50b1ca4346b5c1271bb8240294,
title = "The pattern of visual deficits in amblyopia",
abstract = "Amblyopia is usually defined as a deficit in optotype (Snellen) acuity with no detectable organic cause. We asked whether this visual abnormality is completely characterized by the deficit in optotype acuity, or whether it has distinct forms that are determined by the conditions associated with the acuity loss, such as strabismus or anisometropia. To decide this issue, we measured optotype acuity, Vernier acuity, grating acuity, contrast sensitivity, and binocular function in 427 adults with amblyopia or with risk factors for amblyopia and in a comparison group of 68 normal observers. Optotype acuity accounts for much of the variance in Vernier and grating acuity, and somewhat less of the variance in contrast sensitivity. Nevertheless, there are differences in the patterns of visual loss among the clinically defined categories, particularly between strabismic and anisometropic categories. We used factor analysis to create a succinct representation of our measurement space. This analysis revealed two main dimensions of variation in the visual performance of our abnormal sample, one related to the visual acuity measures (optotype, Vernier, and grating acuity) and the other related to the contrast sensitivity measures (Pelli-Robson and edge contrast sensitivity). Representing our data in this space reveals distinctive distributions of visual loss for different patient categories, and suggests that two consequences of the associated conditions - reduced resolution and loss of binocularity - determine the pattern of visual deficit. Non-binocular observers with mild-to-moderate acuity deficits have, on average, better monocular contrast sensitivity than do binocular observers with the same acuity loss. Despite their superior contrast sensitivity, non-binocular observers typically have poorer optotype acuity and Vernier acuity, at a given level of grating acuity, than those with residual binocular function.",
keywords = "Amblyopia, Binocular vision, Contrast sensitivity, Spatial vision, Vernier acuity",
author = "McKee, {Suzanne P.} and Levi, {Dennis M.} and Movshon, {J. Anthony}",
year = "2003",
month = "7",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1167/3.5.5",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "3",
pages = "380--405",
journal = "Journal of vision",
issn = "1534-7362",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The pattern of visual deficits in amblyopia

AU - McKee, Suzanne P.

AU - Levi, Dennis M.

AU - Movshon, J. Anthony

PY - 2003/7/15

Y1 - 2003/7/15

N2 - Amblyopia is usually defined as a deficit in optotype (Snellen) acuity with no detectable organic cause. We asked whether this visual abnormality is completely characterized by the deficit in optotype acuity, or whether it has distinct forms that are determined by the conditions associated with the acuity loss, such as strabismus or anisometropia. To decide this issue, we measured optotype acuity, Vernier acuity, grating acuity, contrast sensitivity, and binocular function in 427 adults with amblyopia or with risk factors for amblyopia and in a comparison group of 68 normal observers. Optotype acuity accounts for much of the variance in Vernier and grating acuity, and somewhat less of the variance in contrast sensitivity. Nevertheless, there are differences in the patterns of visual loss among the clinically defined categories, particularly between strabismic and anisometropic categories. We used factor analysis to create a succinct representation of our measurement space. This analysis revealed two main dimensions of variation in the visual performance of our abnormal sample, one related to the visual acuity measures (optotype, Vernier, and grating acuity) and the other related to the contrast sensitivity measures (Pelli-Robson and edge contrast sensitivity). Representing our data in this space reveals distinctive distributions of visual loss for different patient categories, and suggests that two consequences of the associated conditions - reduced resolution and loss of binocularity - determine the pattern of visual deficit. Non-binocular observers with mild-to-moderate acuity deficits have, on average, better monocular contrast sensitivity than do binocular observers with the same acuity loss. Despite their superior contrast sensitivity, non-binocular observers typically have poorer optotype acuity and Vernier acuity, at a given level of grating acuity, than those with residual binocular function.

AB - Amblyopia is usually defined as a deficit in optotype (Snellen) acuity with no detectable organic cause. We asked whether this visual abnormality is completely characterized by the deficit in optotype acuity, or whether it has distinct forms that are determined by the conditions associated with the acuity loss, such as strabismus or anisometropia. To decide this issue, we measured optotype acuity, Vernier acuity, grating acuity, contrast sensitivity, and binocular function in 427 adults with amblyopia or with risk factors for amblyopia and in a comparison group of 68 normal observers. Optotype acuity accounts for much of the variance in Vernier and grating acuity, and somewhat less of the variance in contrast sensitivity. Nevertheless, there are differences in the patterns of visual loss among the clinically defined categories, particularly between strabismic and anisometropic categories. We used factor analysis to create a succinct representation of our measurement space. This analysis revealed two main dimensions of variation in the visual performance of our abnormal sample, one related to the visual acuity measures (optotype, Vernier, and grating acuity) and the other related to the contrast sensitivity measures (Pelli-Robson and edge contrast sensitivity). Representing our data in this space reveals distinctive distributions of visual loss for different patient categories, and suggests that two consequences of the associated conditions - reduced resolution and loss of binocularity - determine the pattern of visual deficit. Non-binocular observers with mild-to-moderate acuity deficits have, on average, better monocular contrast sensitivity than do binocular observers with the same acuity loss. Despite their superior contrast sensitivity, non-binocular observers typically have poorer optotype acuity and Vernier acuity, at a given level of grating acuity, than those with residual binocular function.

KW - Amblyopia

KW - Binocular vision

KW - Contrast sensitivity

KW - Spatial vision

KW - Vernier acuity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0141447548&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0141447548&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1167/3.5.5

DO - 10.1167/3.5.5

M3 - Article

VL - 3

SP - 380

EP - 405

JO - Journal of vision

JF - Journal of vision

SN - 1534-7362

IS - 5

ER -