Skip to main content
PMC home page
The British Journal of Ophthalmology logoLink to The British Journal of Ophthalmology
. 1982 Aug;66(8):477–491. doi: 10.1136/bjo.66.8.477

A forced-choice test improves clinical contrast sensitivity testing.

Vaegan, B L Halliday
PMCID: PMC1039832  PMID: 7104264

Abstract

Decreased contrast sensitivity has been demonstrated in early glaucoma, but the deficit in not regularly observed. We designed a prototype for a forced-choice printed test and evaluated it with several other measures of contrast sensitivity. The results also bear on the pattern of loss and the variables which effect performance. Mildly glaucomatous patients show at 6 db (50%) loss of contrast sensitivity at all spatial frequencies tested compared with age matched controls. Moving gratings give the same information as stationary ones, and practice effects are negligible. Contrast sensitivity at or below 2 cycles/degree is poorly correlated with visual acuity and does not change with age in the forced-choice test. Subjective judgment made the apparent contrast threshold higher, age dependent, and more variable, particularly at higher spatial frequencies. The pattern of variability can explain some reports of insignificant effects and why low spatial frequency contrast sensitivity detects glaucoma better than visual acuity. Methods correlated so poorly, despite high reliabilities, that uncontrolled biases must be suspected in subjective measures. Our new forced-choice format was superior to all other tests on at least one formal criterion and always at least equal to them. Improvements in contrast sensitivity screening tests are thus indicated.

Full text

PDF
482

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Arden G. B. Doyne Memorial Lecture, 1978. Visual loss in patients with normal visual acuity. Trans Ophthalmol Soc U K. 1978;98(2):219–231. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Arden G. B., Jacobson J. J. A simple grating test for contrast sensitivity: preliminary results indicate value in screening for glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1978 Jan;17(1):23–32. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Beazley L. D., Illingworth D. J., Jahn A., Greer D. V. Contrast sensitivity in children and adults. Br J Ophthalmol. 1980 Nov;64(11):863–866. doi: 10.1136/bjo.64.11.863. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Campbell F. W., Green D. G. Optical and retinal factors affecting visual resolution. J Physiol. 1965 Dec;181(3):576–593. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1965.sp007784. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Devaney K. O., Johnson H. A. Neuron loss in the aging visual cortex of man. J Gerontol. 1980 Nov;35(6):836–841. doi: 10.1093/geronj/35.6.836. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Enroth-Cugell C., Robson J. G. The contrast sensitivity of retinal ganglion cells of the cat. J Physiol. 1966 Dec;187(3):517–552. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1966.sp008107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hess R. F., Campbell F. W., Greenhalgh T. On the nature of the neural abnormality in human amblyopia; neural aberrations and neural sensitivity loss. Pflugers Arch. 1978 Nov 30;377(3):201–207. doi: 10.1007/BF00584273. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hutman L. P., Sekuler R. Spatial vision and aging. II: Criterion effects. J Gerontol. 1980 Sep;35(5):700–706. doi: 10.1093/geronj/35.5.700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Ross J., Johnstone J. R. Phase and detection of compound gratings. Vision Res. 1980;20(2):189–192. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(80)90161-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. SCHADE O. H., Sr Optical and photoelectric analog of the eye. J Opt Soc Am. 1956 Sep;46(9):721–739. doi: 10.1364/josa.46.000721. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Sekuler R., Hutman L. P., Owsley C. J. Human aging and spatial vision. Science. 1980 Sep 12;209(4462):1255–1256. doi: 10.1126/science.7403884. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Sekuler R., Hutman L. P. Spatial vision and aging. I: Contrast sensitivity. J Gerontol. 1980 Sep;35(5):692–699. doi: 10.1093/geronj/35.5.692. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Singh H., Cooper R. L., Alder V. A., Crawford G. J., Terrell A., Constable I. J. The Arden grating acuity: effect of age and optical factors in the normal patient, with prediction of the false negative rate in screening for glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1981 Aug;65(8):518–524. doi: 10.1136/bjo.65.8.518. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Skalka H. W. Comparison of Snellen acuity, VER acuity, and Arden grating scores in macular and optic nerve diseases. Br J Ophthalmol. 1980 Jan;64(1):24–29. doi: 10.1136/bjo.64.1.24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Sokol S., Domar A., Moskowitz A. Utility of the Arden grating test in glaucoma screening: high false-positive rate in normals over 50 years of age. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1980 Dec;19(12):1529–1533. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The British Journal of Ophthalmology are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES