July 2019
Volume 60, Issue 9
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2019
Testing for vision rather than testing vision
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Eli Peli
    Ophthalmology, Schepens Eye Res Inst, MEEI, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Eli Peli, assigned to Meei (P)
  • Footnotes
    Support  DoD Grant W81XWH-16-1-0033
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science July 2019, Vol.60, 2844. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Eli Peli; Testing for vision rather than testing vision. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2019;60(9):2844.

      Download citation file:

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

  • Supplements

Presentation Description : Clinical vision and psychophysical lab tests using multiple-alternative forced-choice (MAFC) are designed to test the limits (thresholds) of some parameters of a visual system. They are rarely suitable to determine the ability of prosthetic devices to restore vision, yet they are frequently used for that purpose. There are two problems in applying them for prosthetic vision testing; 1) nuisance variables provide spurious cues which can be learnt in repeated training, 2) the interpretation of results is wrong. The ability to perform on the clinical tests is necessary but is insufficient to prove vision restoration, therefore additional tests are needed. Examples for both types of problems will be presented. The types of evidence needed to demonstrate restoration of vision will be discussed.

This abstract was presented at the 2019 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Vancouver, Canada, April 28 - May 2, 2019.


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.