Computer-based primary visual cortex training for treatment of low myopia and early presbyopia

Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society

Volumn 105, Issue , 2007, Pages 132-138

  Durrie, Daniel ^a   McMinn, Peter Shaw ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COLLEGE OF OPTOMETRY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; MYOPIA; PRESBYOPIA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPATIAL FREQUENCY DISCRIMINATION; VISION TEST; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL CORTEX; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ADULT; ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; DEPTH PERCEPTION; HUMANS; LEARNING; MIDDLE AGED; MYOPIA; PERCEPTION; PRESBYOPIA; REFRACTION, OCULAR; REFRACTIVE ERRORS; VISION TESTS; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL CORTEX;

EID: 47749090470     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15456110     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Albrecht DG, Hamilton DB. Striate cortex of monkey and cat: contrast response function. J Neurophysiol 1982;48;217-237.
2. Polat U. Functional architecture of long-range perceptual interactions. Spat Vis 1999;12:143-162.
3. Tolhurst DJ, Movshon JA, Dean AF. The statistical reliability of signals in single neurons in cat and monkey visual cortex. Vision Res 1983;23:775-785.
4. Geisler WS, Albrecht DG. Bayesian analysis of identification performance in monkey visual cortex: nonlinear mechanisms and stimulus certainty. Vision Res 1995;35:2723-2730.
5. Geisler WS, Albrecht DG. Visual cortex neurons in monkeys and cats: detection, discrimination, and identification. Vis Neurosci 1997;14:897-919.
6. Gabor D. Theory of communication. J Inst Electrical Eng 1946;93:429-452.
7. Daugman JG. Two-dimensional spectral analysis of critical receptive field profiles. Vision Res 1980;20:847-856.
8. Polat U. Functional architecture of long-range perceptual interactions. Spat Vis 1999;12:143-162.
9. Kasamatsu T, Polat U, Pettet MW, Norcia AM. Colinear facilitation promotes reliability of single-cell responses in cat striate cortex. Exp Brain Res 2001;138:163-172.
10. Polat U, Mizobe K, Pettet MW, Kasamatsu T, Norcia AM. Collinear stimuli regulate visual responses depending on cell's contrast threshold. Nature 1998;391:580-584.
11. Polat U, Sagi D. Lateral interactions between spatial channels: suppression and facilitation revealed by lateral masking experiments. Vision Res 1993;33:993-999.
12. Polat U, Sagi D. The architecture of perceptual spatial interactions. Vision Res 1994;34:73-78.
13. Levi DM, Polat U. Neural plasticity in adults with amblyopia. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996;93:6830-6834.
14. Levi DM, Polat U, Hu YS. Visual improvement in adults with amblyopia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997;38:1493-1510.
15. Kaarniranta K, Kontkanen M. Visual recovery of the amblyopic eye in an adult patient after loss of the dominant eye. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2003;81:539.
16. Simmers AJ, Gray LS. Improvement of visual function in an adult amblyope. Optom Vis Sci 1999;76:82-87.
17. Fronius M, Cirina L, Cordey A, Ohrloff C. Visual improvement during psychophysical training in an adult amblyopic eye following visual loss in the contralateral eye. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2005;243:278-280.
18. Rahi JS, Logan S, Borja MC, Timms C, Russell-Eggitt I, Taylor D. Prediction of improved vision in the amblyopic eye after visual loss in the non-amblyopic eye. Lancet 2002;36:621-622.
19. Polat U, Ma-Naim T, Belkin M, Sagi D. Improving vision in adult amblyopia by perceptual learning. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004;101:6692-6697.
20. Lim KL, Fan HB. NeuroVision treatment for low myopia following LASIK regression. J Refract Surg 2006;22:104-408.
21. Whittaker SG, Loview-Kitchin J. Visual requirements for reading. Optom Vis Sci 1993;70:54-65.
22. Crossland MD, Culham LE, Rubin GS. Predicting reading fluency in patient with macular disease. Optom Vis Sci 2005;82:11-17.
23. Marron JA, Bailey IL. Visual factors and orientation-mobility performance. Am J Optom Physiol Opt 1982;59:413-426.
24. Owsley C, Ball K, McGwin G, et al. Visual processing impairment and risk of motor vehicle crash among older adults. JAMA 1998;279:1083-1088.
25. Scott IU, Feuer WJ, Jacko JA. Impact of visual function on computer task accuracy and reaction time in a cohort of patients with age-related macular degeneration. Am J Ophthalmol 2002;133:350-357.
26. Ansari EA, Morgan JE, Snowden RJ. Psychophysical characterization of early functional loss in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Br J Ophthalmol 2002;86:1131-1135.
27. Hawkins AS, Szlyk JP, Ardickas Z, Alexander KR, Wilensky JT. Comparison of contrast sensitivity, visual acuity, and Humphrey visual field testing in patients with glaucoma. J Glaucoma 2003;12:134-138.
28. Bellmann C, Unnebrink K, Ruibin GS, Miller D, Holz FG. Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration: results from the Radiation Therapy for Age-Related Macular Degeneration (ARD) Study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2003;241:968-974.
29. Mutyala S, McDonald MB, Scheinblum KA, Ostrick MD, Brint SF, Thompson H. Contrast sensitivity evaluation after laser in situ keratomileusis. Ophthalmology 2000:107:1864-1867.
30. Chan JW, Edwards MH, Woo GC, Woo VC. Contrast sensitivity after laser in situ keratomileusis: one-year follow-up. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002;28:1774-1779.
31. Holliday JT, Dudeja DR, Chang J. Functional vision and corneal changes after laser in situ keratomileusis determined by contrast sensitivity, glare testing, and corneal topography. J Cataract Refract Surg 1999;25:663-669.
32. Yamane N, Miyata K, Samejima T, et al. Ocular higher-order aberrations and contrast sensitivity after conventional laser in situ keratomileusis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;45:3986-3990.