Purchase this article with an account.
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)
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