Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10149307

Clinical accommodation testing.

D A Goss
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Clinical accommodation tests can theoretically be categorized into five different types: 1) tests of accommodative amplitude, 2) tests of relative accommodation, 3) tests of accommodative facility, 4) tests measuring lag of accommodation, and 5) tests finding the dioptric accommodative stimulus at which dioptric stimulus and response levels are equal. Studies of the interrelation of accommodation tests indicate that a complete evaluation of accommodative disorders in nonpresbyopes should include at least one test from four of the five categories. Measurements of accommodative amplitude, lag, and facility, and relative accommodation should be included. Results from the fifth type of test listed above correlate well with lag of accommodation. Recent research is bringing greater acceptance and standardization to accommodative facility testing.

Explore related subjects

Accommodation, OcularHumansVision TestsJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D A Goss. 1992. Clinical accommodation testing.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00055735-199202000-00011

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2000

An area for vergence eye movement in primate frontal cortex.

To view objects at different distances, humans rely on vergence eye movements to appropriately converge or diverge the eyes and on ocular accommodation to focus the object. Despite the importance of these coordinated eye movements (the 'near response') very little is known about the role of the cerebral cortex in their control. As near-response neurons exist within the nucleus reticularis tegmenti pontis, which receives input from the frontal eye field region of frontal cortex, and this cortical region is known to be involved in saccadic and smooth-pursuit eye movements, we propose that a nearby region might play a role in vergence and ocular accommodation. Here we provide evidence from rhesus monkeys that a region of frontal cortex located immediately anterior to the saccade-related frontal eye field region is involved in vergence and ocular accommodation, and in the sensorimotor transformations required for these eye movements. We conclude that the macaque frontal cortex is involved in the control of all voluntary eye movements, and suggest that the definition of the frontal eye fields should be expanded to include this region.

Accommodation, Ocular↗
PubMed2000

Control of response selection by reinforcer value requires interaction of amygdala and orbital prefrontal cortex.

Goal-directed actions are guided by expected outcomes of those actions. Humans with bilateral damage to ventromedial prefrontal cortex, or the amygdala, are deficient in their ability to use information about positive and negative outcomes to guide their choice behavior. Similarly, rats and monkeys with orbital prefrontal or amygdala damage have been found to be impaired in their responses to changing values of outcomes. In the present study, we tested whether direct, functional interaction between the amygdala and the orbital prefrontal cortex is necessary for guiding behavior based on expected outcomes. Unlike control monkeys, rhesus monkeys with surgical disconnection of these two structures, achieved by crossed unilateral lesions of the amygdala in one hemisphere and orbital prefrontal cortex in the other, combined with forebrain commissurotomy, were unable to adjust their choice behavior after a change in the outcome (here, a reduction in the value of a particular reinforcer). The lesions did not affect motivation to work for a food reinforcer, or food preferences, per se. Hence, the amygdala and orbital prefrontal cortex act as part of an integrated neural system guiding decision-making and adaptive response selection.

Accommodation, Ocular↗
PubMed2000

Explaining the moon illusion.

An old explanation of the moon illusion holds that various cues place the horizon moon at an effectively greater distance than the elevated moon. Although both moons have the same angular size, the horizon moon must be perceived as larger. More recent explanations hold that differences in accommodation or other factors cause the elevated moon to appear smaller. As a result of this illusory difference in size, the elevated moon appears to be more distant than the horizon moon. These two explanations, both based on the geometry of stereopsis, lead to two diametrically opposed hypotheses. That is, a depth interval at a long distance is associated with a smaller binocular disparity, whereas an equal depth interval at a smaller distance is associated with a larger disparity. We conducted experiments involving artificial moons and confirmed the hypothesis that the horizon moon is at a greater perceptual distance. Moreover, when a moon of constant angular size was moved closer it was also perceived as growing smaller, which is consistent with the older explanation. Although Emmert's law does not predict the size-distance relationship over long distances, we conclude that the horizon moon is perceived as larger because the perceptual system treats it as though it is much farther away. Finally, we observe that recent explanations substitute perceived size for angular size as a cue to distance. Thus, they imply that perceptions cause perceptions.

Accommodation, Ocular↗