May 2005
Volume 46, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2005
Evaluation of IVA in a Population of Fragile X and Autistic Patients
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • S.S. Block
    Pediatrics, Illinois College of Optometry, Chicago, IL
  • E. Berry–Kravis
    Department of Pediatrics, Neurology, and Biochemistry, RUSH University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
  • S.J. Guter, Jr
    Department of Psychiatry, Section of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL
  • S.E. Krause
    Krause Speech & Language Services, Chicago, IL
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  S.S. Block, None; E. Berry–Kravis, None; S.J. Guter, Jr., None; S.E. Krause, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  FRAXA
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2005, Vol.46, 4595. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      S.S. Block, E. Berry–Kravis, S.J. Guter, Jr, S.E. Krause; Evaluation of IVA in a Population of Fragile X and Autistic Patients . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):4595.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Abstract: : Purpose: The IVA is an auditory and visual continuous performance test created to diagnose ADHD. It was standardized on subjects aged 6–96 years. Exclusion criteria included individuals with neurological diagnoses. This study investigated whether the IVA could be administered to patients with Fragile X and autism and if possible, to develop normative data in this select subject pool. Methods: Forty–eight patients (18–49 years of age) with a diagnosis of Fragile X (36), Fragile X/autism (6) or autism (3) were administered the IVA. All subjects were able to complete the task. Results: The range of raw scores was auditory: 4–125 (mean 68.7 ±41.1) and visual 6–119 (49.0 ±34.8) with high omission/commission mean responses – auditory 40.8(±36.7)/44.4 (±40.8) visual 60.4 (±34.8)/38.3 (±34.3). Higher visual to auditory responses were seen in 75% of the subjects. Males (n–39) had slower mean reaction times than females (n–9) for auditory (males: 764 msec. ±170.9, females: 686.44 msec. ±65.5) and visual (males: 726 msec., females: 624 msec.) stimuli. Comparing intelligence scores with raw scores reflect a correlation (p<.005) with auditory but not visual scores. Conclusions: The validity of the IVA in this subject population is questionable based on the normative data. The IVA raw scores, omission errors, commission errors, and mean reaction time appear to be more appropriate measures for this group keeping in mind the large range of capabilities and responses in this subject pool.

Keywords: learning • clinical research methodology 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.