↓ Skip to main content

Marked dissociation of photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity even in normal observers

Overview of attention for article published in Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
Marked dissociation of photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivity even in normal observers
Published in
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00417-015-3020-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hannah Hertenstein, Michael Bach, Nikolai Johannes Gross, Flemming Beisse

Abstract

Although contrast vision is not routinely tested, it is important: for instance, it predicts traffic incidents better than visual acuity. Mesopic contrast sensitivity (CS) testing approximates low-lighting conditions but entails dark adaptation, which can disrupt clinical routine. In receptor-specific diseases, a dissociation of photopic and mesopic sensitivity would be expected, but can photopic CS act as a surrogate measure for mesopic CS, at least for screening purposes? Photopic and mesopic contrast sensitivities were studied in three groups: 47 normal subjects, 23 subjects with glaucoma, and three subjects with cataract. Twenty-eight of the normal subjects were additionally tested with artificial blur. Photopic contrast sensitivity was assessed with both the Freiburg Acuity and Contrast Test (FrACT) and the Mars Letter Contrast Sensitivity Charts. Mesopic contrast sensitivity, without and with glare, was measured with the Mesoptometer IIb. Coefficients of repeatability and limits of agreement were calculated for all tests. Test-retest limits of agreement were ± 0.17 logCS for Mars, ± 0.21 logCS for FrACT, and ±0.20 logCS / ± 0.14 logCS for Mesoptometer IIb without and with glare, respectively. In terms of inter-test comparison, Mars and FrACT largely agreed, except for ceiling effects in the Mars test. While mesopic and photopic contrast sensitivities correlate significantly (r  = 0.51, p < 0.01), only 27 % of the variance is in common. In particular, subjects with high photopic results may be nearly as likely to have low as well as high mesopic results. The photopic contrast sensitivity tests assessed here cannot serve as surrogate measures for current mesopic contrast sensitivity tests. Low photopic CS predicts low mesopic CS, but with normal photopic CS, mesopic CS can be normal or pathologic.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 19%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Other 13 22%
Unknown 7 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Psychology 6 10%
Engineering 5 8%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 14 24%