Accommodative lag under habitual seeing conditions: Comparison between adult myopes and emmetropes

Japanese Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 47, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 291-298

  Nakatsuka, Chiaki ^a   Hasebe, Satoshi ^a   Nonaka, Fumitaka ^a   Ohtsuki, Hiroshi ^a  

^a OKAYAMA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Accommodation; Accommodative lag; Binocularity; Convergence; Myopia

Indexed keywords

ACCOMMODATION; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; BINOCULAR VISION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMMETROPIA; EYE DISEASE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MONOCULAR VISION; MYOPIA; OPEN FIELD INFRARED AUTOREFRACTOMETER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REFRACTOMETER; SPECTACLES; STIMULUS RESPONSE; STUDENT T TEST; VISION; VISUAL STIMULATION;

EID: 0037686657     PISSN: 00215155     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0021-5155(03)00013-3     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Rouse M.W., Hutter R.F., Shiftlett R. A normative study of the accommodative lag in elementary school children. Am J Optom Physiol Optics. 61:1984;693-697.
2. McBrien N., Millodot M. The effect of refractive error on the accommodative response gradient. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 6:1986;145-149.
3. Rosenfield M., Gilmartin B. Disparity-induced accommodation in late-onset myopia. Ophthalmic Physiol Optics. 8:1988;353-355.
4. Gwiazda J., Thorn F., Bauer J., et al. Myopic children show insufficient accommodation response to blur. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 34:1993;690-694.
5. Leat S.J., Gargon J.L. Accommodative response in children and young adults using retinoscopy. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 16:1996;375-384.
6. Abbott M.L., Schmid K.L., Strang N.C. Differences in the accommodation stimulus response curves of adult myopes and emmetropes. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 18:1998;13-20.
7. Smith E. Environmentally induced refractive errors in animals. Rosenfield M., Gilmartin B. Myopia and near work. 1998;57-90 Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford.
8. Schor C. The influence of interactions between accommodation and convergence on the lag of accommodation. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 19:1998;1-17.
9. Rosenfield M., Abraham-Cohen J.A. Blur sensitivity in myopia. Optom Vis Sci. 76:1999;303-307.
10. Rosenfield M., Mallen E.A.H. Clinical evaluation of the Shin-Nippon SRW-50000 autorefractor in adults. Ophthalmic Physiol Optics. 21:2001;101-107.
11. Bland M. Repeatability and measurement error. An introduction to medical statistics. 2nd ed. 1995;266-269 Oxford Medical Publications, New York.
12. Guyton D., O'Conner G.M. Dynamic retinoscopy. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2:1991;78-80.
13. Rosenfield M., Chiu N.N. Repeatability of subjective and objective refraction. Optom Vis Sci. 72:1995;577-579.
14. Tsukamoto M., Nakajima T., Nishino J., et al. The binocular accommodative response in uncorrected ametropis. Optom Vis Sci. 78:2001;763-768.
15. Saishin M., Uozato H., Yokoyama K., et al. Dynamic refraction 1. As regards accommodative lag. Nihon Ganka Kiyo (Folia Ophthalmol Jpn). 33:1982;1052-1057.
16. Marran L., Schor C.M. Lens induced aniso-accommodation. Vision Res. 38:1998;3601-3619.
17. Goss D.A., Rainey B.B. Relationship of accommodative response and nearpoint phoria in a sample of myopic children. Optom Vis Sci. 76:1999;292-294.