Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study

<b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participa...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Ali Mazyed Alsaqr [verfasserIn] Hisham AlShareef [verfasserIn] Faisal Alhajri [verfasserIn] Ali Abusharha [verfasserIn] Raied Fagehi [verfasserIn] Ahmad Alharbi [verfasserIn] Saud Alanazi [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2021

Schlagwörter:	accommodation macular degeneration pediatrics visual impairment accommodation lead accommodation lag

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Vision - MDPI AG, 2017, 5(2021), 3, p 35
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:5 ; year:2021 ; number:3, p 35

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.3390/vision5030035

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ00623061X

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ00623061X
003	DE-627
005	20240412141215.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230225s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.3390/vision5030035 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ00623061X
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a QH301-705.5
100	0		\|a Ali Mazyed Alsaqr \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study
264		1	\|c 2021
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a <b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participants aged 12–15 years were recruited. Accommodative response was measured using autorefractor (Grand Seiko WV500) at distances of accommodative demand of 33, 25, and 20 cm. The targets were one-line-above participant threshold acuity. The participants’ accommodative responses were compared between both groups after calibration for refractive errors and the vertex distance of the glasses. Visual acuity and refractive status were also assessed. <b<Results</b<: The age was not significantly different between both participant groups. The visual acuity of visually impaired patients was 6/30 to 6/240, and that of visually normal participants was 6/7.5 or better. Ten of the visually impaired patients and 29 of visually normal participants were myopic. In total, 61–73% of visually impaired patients showed an accommodative lead. Five subtypes of accommodative response were observed. In general, the accommodative inaccuracy increased with increasing accommodative demand. However, the visually normal participants largely exhibited an accommodative lag. A mild-to-moderate relationship was observed between visual acuity and accommodative response (<i<r</i< = 0.3–0.5, <i<p</i< < 0.05). <b<Conclusion</b<: Accommodative response in young visually impaired patients can be variable and on an individual basis. Low vision specialists should anticipate accommodative response outside the normal range. Therefore, we shall consider evaluating each patient’s accommodative response before prescribing any near addition lenses. Accommodation inaccuracy is often more complex than predicted due to increased depth of focus caused by reduced visual acuity.
650		4	\|a accommodation
650		4	\|a macular degeneration
650		4	\|a pediatrics
650		4	\|a visual impairment
650		4	\|a accommodation lead
650		4	\|a accommodation lag
653		0	\|a Biology (General)
700	0		\|a Hisham AlShareef \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Faisal Alhajri \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Ali Abusharha \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Raied Fagehi \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Ahmad Alharbi \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Saud Alanazi \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Vision \|d MDPI AG, 2017 \|g 5(2021), 3, p 35 \|w (DE-627)886148782 \|w (DE-600)2893634-6 \|x 24115150 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:5 \|g year:2021 \|g number:3, p 35
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.3390/vision5030035 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/5/3/35 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2411-5150 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 5 \|j 2021 \|e 3, p 35

Indexfelder

author_variant	a m a ama h a ha f a fa a a aa r f rf a a aa s a sa
matchkey_str	article:24115150:2021----::comdtvrsosiptetwtcnrlillsaa
hierarchy_sort_str	2021
callnumber-subject-code	QH
publishDate	2021
allfields	10.3390/vision5030035 doi (DE-627)DOAJ00623061X (DE-599)DOAJ2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QH301-705.5 Ali Mazyed Alsaqr verfasserin aut Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participants aged 12–15 years were recruited. Accommodative response was measured using autorefractor (Grand Seiko WV500) at distances of accommodative demand of 33, 25, and 20 cm. The targets were one-line-above participant threshold acuity. The participants’ accommodative responses were compared between both groups after calibration for refractive errors and the vertex distance of the glasses. Visual acuity and refractive status were also assessed. <b<Results</b<: The age was not significantly different between both participant groups. The visual acuity of visually impaired patients was 6/30 to 6/240, and that of visually normal participants was 6/7.5 or better. Ten of the visually impaired patients and 29 of visually normal participants were myopic. In total, 61–73% of visually impaired patients showed an accommodative lead. Five subtypes of accommodative response were observed. In general, the accommodative inaccuracy increased with increasing accommodative demand. However, the visually normal participants largely exhibited an accommodative lag. A mild-to-moderate relationship was observed between visual acuity and accommodative response (<i<r</i< = 0.3–0.5, <i<p</i< < 0.05). <b<Conclusion</b<: Accommodative response in young visually impaired patients can be variable and on an individual basis. Low vision specialists should anticipate accommodative response outside the normal range. Therefore, we shall consider evaluating each patient’s accommodative response before prescribing any near addition lenses. Accommodation inaccuracy is often more complex than predicted due to increased depth of focus caused by reduced visual acuity. accommodation macular degeneration pediatrics visual impairment accommodation lead accommodation lag Biology (General) Hisham AlShareef verfasserin aut Faisal Alhajri verfasserin aut Ali Abusharha verfasserin aut Raied Fagehi verfasserin aut Ahmad Alharbi verfasserin aut Saud Alanazi verfasserin aut In Vision MDPI AG, 2017 5(2021), 3, p 35 (DE-627)886148782 (DE-600)2893634-6 24115150 nnns volume:5 year:2021 number:3, p 35 https://doi.org/10.3390/vision5030035 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/5/3/35 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2411-5150 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 5 2021 3, p 35
spelling	10.3390/vision5030035 doi (DE-627)DOAJ00623061X (DE-599)DOAJ2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QH301-705.5 Ali Mazyed Alsaqr verfasserin aut Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participants aged 12–15 years were recruited. Accommodative response was measured using autorefractor (Grand Seiko WV500) at distances of accommodative demand of 33, 25, and 20 cm. The targets were one-line-above participant threshold acuity. The participants’ accommodative responses were compared between both groups after calibration for refractive errors and the vertex distance of the glasses. Visual acuity and refractive status were also assessed. <b<Results</b<: The age was not significantly different between both participant groups. The visual acuity of visually impaired patients was 6/30 to 6/240, and that of visually normal participants was 6/7.5 or better. Ten of the visually impaired patients and 29 of visually normal participants were myopic. In total, 61–73% of visually impaired patients showed an accommodative lead. Five subtypes of accommodative response were observed. In general, the accommodative inaccuracy increased with increasing accommodative demand. However, the visually normal participants largely exhibited an accommodative lag. A mild-to-moderate relationship was observed between visual acuity and accommodative response (<i<r</i< = 0.3–0.5, <i<p</i< < 0.05). <b<Conclusion</b<: Accommodative response in young visually impaired patients can be variable and on an individual basis. Low vision specialists should anticipate accommodative response outside the normal range. Therefore, we shall consider evaluating each patient’s accommodative response before prescribing any near addition lenses. Accommodation inaccuracy is often more complex than predicted due to increased depth of focus caused by reduced visual acuity. accommodation macular degeneration pediatrics visual impairment accommodation lead accommodation lag Biology (General) Hisham AlShareef verfasserin aut Faisal Alhajri verfasserin aut Ali Abusharha verfasserin aut Raied Fagehi verfasserin aut Ahmad Alharbi verfasserin aut Saud Alanazi verfasserin aut In Vision MDPI AG, 2017 5(2021), 3, p 35 (DE-627)886148782 (DE-600)2893634-6 24115150 nnns volume:5 year:2021 number:3, p 35 https://doi.org/10.3390/vision5030035 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/5/3/35 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2411-5150 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 5 2021 3, p 35
allfields_unstemmed	10.3390/vision5030035 doi (DE-627)DOAJ00623061X (DE-599)DOAJ2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QH301-705.5 Ali Mazyed Alsaqr verfasserin aut Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participants aged 12–15 years were recruited. Accommodative response was measured using autorefractor (Grand Seiko WV500) at distances of accommodative demand of 33, 25, and 20 cm. The targets were one-line-above participant threshold acuity. The participants’ accommodative responses were compared between both groups after calibration for refractive errors and the vertex distance of the glasses. Visual acuity and refractive status were also assessed. <b<Results</b<: The age was not significantly different between both participant groups. The visual acuity of visually impaired patients was 6/30 to 6/240, and that of visually normal participants was 6/7.5 or better. Ten of the visually impaired patients and 29 of visually normal participants were myopic. In total, 61–73% of visually impaired patients showed an accommodative lead. Five subtypes of accommodative response were observed. In general, the accommodative inaccuracy increased with increasing accommodative demand. However, the visually normal participants largely exhibited an accommodative lag. A mild-to-moderate relationship was observed between visual acuity and accommodative response (<i<r</i< = 0.3–0.5, <i<p</i< < 0.05). <b<Conclusion</b<: Accommodative response in young visually impaired patients can be variable and on an individual basis. Low vision specialists should anticipate accommodative response outside the normal range. Therefore, we shall consider evaluating each patient’s accommodative response before prescribing any near addition lenses. Accommodation inaccuracy is often more complex than predicted due to increased depth of focus caused by reduced visual acuity. accommodation macular degeneration pediatrics visual impairment accommodation lead accommodation lag Biology (General) Hisham AlShareef verfasserin aut Faisal Alhajri verfasserin aut Ali Abusharha verfasserin aut Raied Fagehi verfasserin aut Ahmad Alharbi verfasserin aut Saud Alanazi verfasserin aut In Vision MDPI AG, 2017 5(2021), 3, p 35 (DE-627)886148782 (DE-600)2893634-6 24115150 nnns volume:5 year:2021 number:3, p 35 https://doi.org/10.3390/vision5030035 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/5/3/35 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2411-5150 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 5 2021 3, p 35
allfieldsGer	10.3390/vision5030035 doi (DE-627)DOAJ00623061X (DE-599)DOAJ2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QH301-705.5 Ali Mazyed Alsaqr verfasserin aut Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participants aged 12–15 years were recruited. Accommodative response was measured using autorefractor (Grand Seiko WV500) at distances of accommodative demand of 33, 25, and 20 cm. The targets were one-line-above participant threshold acuity. The participants’ accommodative responses were compared between both groups after calibration for refractive errors and the vertex distance of the glasses. Visual acuity and refractive status were also assessed. <b<Results</b<: The age was not significantly different between both participant groups. The visual acuity of visually impaired patients was 6/30 to 6/240, and that of visually normal participants was 6/7.5 or better. Ten of the visually impaired patients and 29 of visually normal participants were myopic. In total, 61–73% of visually impaired patients showed an accommodative lead. Five subtypes of accommodative response were observed. In general, the accommodative inaccuracy increased with increasing accommodative demand. However, the visually normal participants largely exhibited an accommodative lag. A mild-to-moderate relationship was observed between visual acuity and accommodative response (<i<r</i< = 0.3–0.5, <i<p</i< < 0.05). <b<Conclusion</b<: Accommodative response in young visually impaired patients can be variable and on an individual basis. Low vision specialists should anticipate accommodative response outside the normal range. Therefore, we shall consider evaluating each patient’s accommodative response before prescribing any near addition lenses. Accommodation inaccuracy is often more complex than predicted due to increased depth of focus caused by reduced visual acuity. accommodation macular degeneration pediatrics visual impairment accommodation lead accommodation lag Biology (General) Hisham AlShareef verfasserin aut Faisal Alhajri verfasserin aut Ali Abusharha verfasserin aut Raied Fagehi verfasserin aut Ahmad Alharbi verfasserin aut Saud Alanazi verfasserin aut In Vision MDPI AG, 2017 5(2021), 3, p 35 (DE-627)886148782 (DE-600)2893634-6 24115150 nnns volume:5 year:2021 number:3, p 35 https://doi.org/10.3390/vision5030035 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/5/3/35 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2411-5150 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 5 2021 3, p 35
allfieldsSound	10.3390/vision5030035 doi (DE-627)DOAJ00623061X (DE-599)DOAJ2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QH301-705.5 Ali Mazyed Alsaqr verfasserin aut Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier <b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participants aged 12–15 years were recruited. Accommodative response was measured using autorefractor (Grand Seiko WV500) at distances of accommodative demand of 33, 25, and 20 cm. The targets were one-line-above participant threshold acuity. The participants’ accommodative responses were compared between both groups after calibration for refractive errors and the vertex distance of the glasses. Visual acuity and refractive status were also assessed. <b<Results</b<: The age was not significantly different between both participant groups. The visual acuity of visually impaired patients was 6/30 to 6/240, and that of visually normal participants was 6/7.5 or better. Ten of the visually impaired patients and 29 of visually normal participants were myopic. In total, 61–73% of visually impaired patients showed an accommodative lead. Five subtypes of accommodative response were observed. In general, the accommodative inaccuracy increased with increasing accommodative demand. However, the visually normal participants largely exhibited an accommodative lag. A mild-to-moderate relationship was observed between visual acuity and accommodative response (<i<r</i< = 0.3–0.5, <i<p</i< < 0.05). <b<Conclusion</b<: Accommodative response in young visually impaired patients can be variable and on an individual basis. Low vision specialists should anticipate accommodative response outside the normal range. Therefore, we shall consider evaluating each patient’s accommodative response before prescribing any near addition lenses. Accommodation inaccuracy is often more complex than predicted due to increased depth of focus caused by reduced visual acuity. accommodation macular degeneration pediatrics visual impairment accommodation lead accommodation lag Biology (General) Hisham AlShareef verfasserin aut Faisal Alhajri verfasserin aut Ali Abusharha verfasserin aut Raied Fagehi verfasserin aut Ahmad Alharbi verfasserin aut Saud Alanazi verfasserin aut In Vision MDPI AG, 2017 5(2021), 3, p 35 (DE-627)886148782 (DE-600)2893634-6 24115150 nnns volume:5 year:2021 number:3, p 35 https://doi.org/10.3390/vision5030035 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 kostenfrei https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/5/3/35 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2411-5150 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 5 2021 3, p 35
language	English
source	In Vision 5(2021), 3, p 35 volume:5 year:2021 number:3, p 35
sourceStr	In Vision 5(2021), 3, p 35 volume:5 year:2021 number:3, p 35
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	accommodation macular degeneration pediatrics visual impairment accommodation lead accommodation lag Biology (General)
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Vision
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Ali Mazyed Alsaqr @@aut@@ Hisham AlShareef @@aut@@ Faisal Alhajri @@aut@@ Ali Abusharha @@aut@@ Raied Fagehi @@aut@@ Ahmad Alharbi @@aut@@ Saud Alanazi @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2021-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	886148782
id	DOAJ00623061X
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ00623061X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240412141215.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230225s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3390/vision5030035</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ00623061X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">QH301-705.5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ali Mazyed Alsaqr</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a"><b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participants aged 12–15 years were recruited. Accommodative response was measured using autorefractor (Grand Seiko WV500) at distances of accommodative demand of 33, 25, and 20 cm. The targets were one-line-above participant threshold acuity. The participants’ accommodative responses were compared between both groups after calibration for refractive errors and the vertex distance of the glasses. Visual acuity and refractive status were also assessed. <b<Results</b<: The age was not significantly different between both participant groups. The visual acuity of visually impaired patients was 6/30 to 6/240, and that of visually normal participants was 6/7.5 or better. Ten of the visually impaired patients and 29 of visually normal participants were myopic. In total, 61–73% of visually impaired patients showed an accommodative lead. Five subtypes of accommodative response were observed. In general, the accommodative inaccuracy increased with increasing accommodative demand. However, the visually normal participants largely exhibited an accommodative lag. A mild-to-moderate relationship was observed between visual acuity and accommodative response (<i<r</i< = 0.3–0.5, <i<p</i< < 0.05). <b<Conclusion</b<: Accommodative response in young visually impaired patients can be variable and on an individual basis. Low vision specialists should anticipate accommodative response outside the normal range. Therefore, we shall consider evaluating each patient’s accommodative response before prescribing any near addition lenses. Accommodation inaccuracy is often more complex than predicted due to increased depth of focus caused by reduced visual acuity.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">accommodation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">macular degeneration</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">pediatrics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">visual impairment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">accommodation lead</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">accommodation lag</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Biology (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hisham AlShareef</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Faisal Alhajri</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ali Abusharha</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Raied Fagehi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ahmad Alharbi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Saud Alanazi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Vision</subfield><subfield code="d">MDPI AG, 2017</subfield><subfield code="g">5(2021), 3, p 35</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)886148782</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2893634-6</subfield><subfield code="x">24115150</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:5</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3, p 35</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3390/vision5030035</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/5/3/35</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2411-5150</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">5</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">3, p 35</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	Q - Science
author	Ali Mazyed Alsaqr
spellingShingle	Ali Mazyed Alsaqr misc QH301-705.5 misc accommodation misc macular degeneration misc pediatrics misc visual impairment misc accommodation lead misc accommodation lag misc Biology (General) Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study
authorStr	Ali Mazyed Alsaqr
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)886148782
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	QH301-705
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	24115150
topic_title	QH301-705.5 Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study accommodation macular degeneration pediatrics visual impairment accommodation lead accommodation lag
topic	misc QH301-705.5 misc accommodation misc macular degeneration misc pediatrics misc visual impairment misc accommodation lead misc accommodation lag misc Biology (General)
topic_unstemmed	misc QH301-705.5 misc accommodation misc macular degeneration misc pediatrics misc visual impairment misc accommodation lead misc accommodation lag misc Biology (General)
topic_browse	misc QH301-705.5 misc accommodation misc macular degeneration misc pediatrics misc visual impairment misc accommodation lead misc accommodation lag misc Biology (General)
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Vision
hierarchy_parent_id	886148782
hierarchy_top_title	Vision
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)886148782 (DE-600)2893634-6
title	Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ00623061X (DE-599)DOAJ2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616
title_full	Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study
author_sort	Ali Mazyed Alsaqr
journal	Vision
journalStr	Vision
callnumber-first-code	Q
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2021
contenttype_str_mv	txt
author_browse	Ali Mazyed Alsaqr Hisham AlShareef Faisal Alhajri Ali Abusharha Raied Fagehi Ahmad Alharbi Saud Alanazi
container_volume	5
class	QH301-705.5
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Ali Mazyed Alsaqr
doi_str_mv	10.3390/vision5030035
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	accommodative response in patients with central field loss: a matched case-control study
callnumber	QH301-705.5
title_auth	Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study
abstract	<b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participants aged 12–15 years were recruited. Accommodative response was measured using autorefractor (Grand Seiko WV500) at distances of accommodative demand of 33, 25, and 20 cm. The targets were one-line-above participant threshold acuity. The participants’ accommodative responses were compared between both groups after calibration for refractive errors and the vertex distance of the glasses. Visual acuity and refractive status were also assessed. <b<Results</b<: The age was not significantly different between both participant groups. The visual acuity of visually impaired patients was 6/30 to 6/240, and that of visually normal participants was 6/7.5 or better. Ten of the visually impaired patients and 29 of visually normal participants were myopic. In total, 61–73% of visually impaired patients showed an accommodative lead. Five subtypes of accommodative response were observed. In general, the accommodative inaccuracy increased with increasing accommodative demand. However, the visually normal participants largely exhibited an accommodative lag. A mild-to-moderate relationship was observed between visual acuity and accommodative response (<i<r</i< = 0.3–0.5, <i<p</i< < 0.05). <b<Conclusion</b<: Accommodative response in young visually impaired patients can be variable and on an individual basis. Low vision specialists should anticipate accommodative response outside the normal range. Therefore, we shall consider evaluating each patient’s accommodative response before prescribing any near addition lenses. Accommodation inaccuracy is often more complex than predicted due to increased depth of focus caused by reduced visual acuity.
abstractGer	<b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participants aged 12–15 years were recruited. Accommodative response was measured using autorefractor (Grand Seiko WV500) at distances of accommodative demand of 33, 25, and 20 cm. The targets were one-line-above participant threshold acuity. The participants’ accommodative responses were compared between both groups after calibration for refractive errors and the vertex distance of the glasses. Visual acuity and refractive status were also assessed. <b<Results</b<: The age was not significantly different between both participant groups. The visual acuity of visually impaired patients was 6/30 to 6/240, and that of visually normal participants was 6/7.5 or better. Ten of the visually impaired patients and 29 of visually normal participants were myopic. In total, 61–73% of visually impaired patients showed an accommodative lead. Five subtypes of accommodative response were observed. In general, the accommodative inaccuracy increased with increasing accommodative demand. However, the visually normal participants largely exhibited an accommodative lag. A mild-to-moderate relationship was observed between visual acuity and accommodative response (<i<r</i< = 0.3–0.5, <i<p</i< < 0.05). <b<Conclusion</b<: Accommodative response in young visually impaired patients can be variable and on an individual basis. Low vision specialists should anticipate accommodative response outside the normal range. Therefore, we shall consider evaluating each patient’s accommodative response before prescribing any near addition lenses. Accommodation inaccuracy is often more complex than predicted due to increased depth of focus caused by reduced visual acuity.
abstract_unstemmed	<b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participants aged 12–15 years were recruited. Accommodative response was measured using autorefractor (Grand Seiko WV500) at distances of accommodative demand of 33, 25, and 20 cm. The targets were one-line-above participant threshold acuity. The participants’ accommodative responses were compared between both groups after calibration for refractive errors and the vertex distance of the glasses. Visual acuity and refractive status were also assessed. <b<Results</b<: The age was not significantly different between both participant groups. The visual acuity of visually impaired patients was 6/30 to 6/240, and that of visually normal participants was 6/7.5 or better. Ten of the visually impaired patients and 29 of visually normal participants were myopic. In total, 61–73% of visually impaired patients showed an accommodative lead. Five subtypes of accommodative response were observed. In general, the accommodative inaccuracy increased with increasing accommodative demand. However, the visually normal participants largely exhibited an accommodative lag. A mild-to-moderate relationship was observed between visual acuity and accommodative response (<i<r</i< = 0.3–0.5, <i<p</i< < 0.05). <b<Conclusion</b<: Accommodative response in young visually impaired patients can be variable and on an individual basis. Low vision specialists should anticipate accommodative response outside the normal range. Therefore, we shall consider evaluating each patient’s accommodative response before prescribing any near addition lenses. Accommodation inaccuracy is often more complex than predicted due to increased depth of focus caused by reduced visual acuity.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	3, p 35
title_short	Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study
url	https://doi.org/10.3390/vision5030035 https://doaj.org/article/2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616 https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/5/3/35 https://doaj.org/toc/2411-5150
remote_bool	true
author2	Hisham AlShareef Faisal Alhajri Ali Abusharha Raied Fagehi Ahmad Alharbi Saud Alanazi
author2Str	Hisham AlShareef Faisal Alhajri Ali Abusharha Raied Fagehi Ahmad Alharbi Saud Alanazi
ppnlink	886148782
callnumber-subject	QH - Natural History and Biology
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.3390/vision5030035
callnumber-a	QH301-705.5
up_date	2024-07-03T19:44:15.770Z
_version_	1803588317505126401
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ00623061X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240412141215.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230225s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3390/vision5030035</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ00623061X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">QH301-705.5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ali Mazyed Alsaqr</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a"><b<Purpose</b<: This study was conducted to evaluate the accommodative response in young participants with visual impairment in comparison with visually normal participants. <b<Methods</b<: Fifteen participants with confirmed visual impairment and 30 visually normal participants aged 12–15 years were recruited. Accommodative response was measured using autorefractor (Grand Seiko WV500) at distances of accommodative demand of 33, 25, and 20 cm. The targets were one-line-above participant threshold acuity. The participants’ accommodative responses were compared between both groups after calibration for refractive errors and the vertex distance of the glasses. Visual acuity and refractive status were also assessed. <b<Results</b<: The age was not significantly different between both participant groups. The visual acuity of visually impaired patients was 6/30 to 6/240, and that of visually normal participants was 6/7.5 or better. Ten of the visually impaired patients and 29 of visually normal participants were myopic. In total, 61–73% of visually impaired patients showed an accommodative lead. Five subtypes of accommodative response were observed. In general, the accommodative inaccuracy increased with increasing accommodative demand. However, the visually normal participants largely exhibited an accommodative lag. A mild-to-moderate relationship was observed between visual acuity and accommodative response (<i<r</i< = 0.3–0.5, <i<p</i< < 0.05). <b<Conclusion</b<: Accommodative response in young visually impaired patients can be variable and on an individual basis. Low vision specialists should anticipate accommodative response outside the normal range. Therefore, we shall consider evaluating each patient’s accommodative response before prescribing any near addition lenses. Accommodation inaccuracy is often more complex than predicted due to increased depth of focus caused by reduced visual acuity.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">accommodation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">macular degeneration</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">pediatrics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">visual impairment</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">accommodation lead</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">accommodation lag</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Biology (General)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hisham AlShareef</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Faisal Alhajri</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ali Abusharha</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Raied Fagehi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ahmad Alharbi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Saud Alanazi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Vision</subfield><subfield code="d">MDPI AG, 2017</subfield><subfield code="g">5(2021), 3, p 35</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)886148782</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2893634-6</subfield><subfield code="x">24115150</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:5</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:3, p 35</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3390/vision5030035</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/2a9c9697d1f34daa840044d259bdb616</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://www.mdpi.com/2411-5150/5/3/35</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2411-5150</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">5</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">3, p 35</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4028378

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Accommodative Response in Patients with Central Field Loss: A Matched Case-Control Study

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?