Recognition distance of pedestrian traffic signals by individuals with low vision

Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development

Volumn 43, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 771-775

  Williams, Michael D ^a   Van Houten, Ron ^b   Blasch, Bruce B ^a  

^a ATLANTA VA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b MOUNT SAINT VINCENT UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Accessible pedestrian signals; Animated eyes; Blindness; Crosswalk signals; Low vision; Low vision pedestrians; Pedestrians; Recognition distance; Traffic icons; Vision rehabilitation

Indexed keywords

PATIENT REHABILITATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PEDESTRIAN SAFETY; VISION;

ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNALS; ANIMATED EYES; BLINDNESS; CROSSWALK SIGNALS; LOW VISION; PEDESTRIANS; RECOGNITION DISTANCE; VISION REHABILITATION;

TRAFFIC SIGNALS;

AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; DISTANCE PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; LIGHT; MALE; PEDESTRIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECOGNITION; TRAFFIC; VISUAL DISORDER;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR VEHICLES; VISION; VISION DISORDERS;

EID: 33846293270     PISSN: 07487711     EISSN: 07487711     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1682/JRRD.2005.02.0040     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Crews JE. Measuring rehabilitation outcomes and the public policies of aging and blindness. In: Weber ND, editor. Vision and aging: Issues on social work practice. New York (NY): Hawthorn Press; 1992. p. 137-52.
2. Pope AM, Tarlov AR. Disability in America: Toward a national agenda for prevention. Washington (DC): National Academy Press; 1991.
3. Manton KG, Corder LS, Stallard E. Estimates of change in chronic disability and institutional incidence and prevalence rates in the U.S. elderly population from the 1982, 1984, and 1989 National Long Term Care Survey. J Gerontol. 1993;48(4):S153-66.
4. De l'Aune W, Williams M, Watson G, Schuckers P, Ventimiglia G. Clinical application of rehabilitation outcomes. J Vis Impair Blind. 2004;98(4):197-211.
5. Desai M, Pratt LA, Lentzner H, Robinson KN. Trends in vision and hearing among older Americans. Aging Trends. 2001;(2):1-8.
6. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Blind rehabilitation gold ribbon panel report. Washington (DC): Department of Veterans Affairs Blind Rehabilitation Service; 1999.
7. De l'Aune W, Welsh RL, Williams MD. A national outcomes assessment of the rehabilitation of adults with visual impairments. J Vis Impair Blind. 2000;94(5):281-91.
8. Van Houten R, Blasch B, Malenfant JE. A comparison of the recognition distance of several types of pedestrian signals with low-vision pedestrians. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2001; 38(4):443-48.
9. Haymes SA, Johnston AW, Heyes AD. Preliminary investigation of the responsiveness of the Melbourne Low Vision ADL index to low-vision rehabilitation. Optom Vis Sci. 2001;78(6):373-80.
10. Vanden Bosch ME, Wall M. Visual acuity scored by the letter-by-letter or probit methods has lower retest variability than the line assignment method. Eye. 1997;11(Pt 3):411-17.
11. Raasch TW, Bailey IL, Bullimore MA. Repeatability of visual acuity measurement. Optom Vis Sci. 1998;75(5):342-48.