研究目的
To compare fixation variability during standard automated perimetry among dominant eye fixation, non-dominant eye fixation, and binocular fixation conditions, and to evaluate the association of fixation variability with ocular position and fusional amplitude during binocular fixation.
研究成果
Fixation variability was significantly lower in binocular fixation conditions during long-duration visual field measurements compared to monocular fixation conditions. No significant differences were found during short-duration foveal threshold measurements. There was no correlation between fixation variability and ocular position or fusional amplitude during binocular fixation.
研究不足
1. Participants were all healthy young subjects, limiting generalizability to patients with ocular diseases.
2. The pupil-tracking approach could not detect rotatory deviation, and slight movement of the eye-tracking glasses might affect fixation variability measurements.
3. The sample size was adequate for repeated-measures analysis but insufficient for correlation coefficient analysis.
4. The study could not distinguish between genuine fixation wandering and gaze attraction from projected stimuli.
5. A ten-minute interval between tests might be insufficient to exclude a fatigue effect.
1:Experimental Design and Method Selection:
The study was a cross-sectional design comparing fixation variability under three conditions (dominant eye fixation, non-dominant eye fixation, and binocular fixation) using standard automated perimetry. Fixation variability was measured using wearable eye-tracking glasses.
2:Sample Selection and Data Sources:
Thirty-five healthy young participants with at least three previous standard automated perimetry experiences were included. Comprehensive ophthalmic examinations were conducted to ensure eligibility.
3:List of Experimental Equipment and Materials:
Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA; Carl Zeiss Meditech) for standard automated perimetry, wearable eye-tracking glasses (Tobii glass II; Tobii Technology) for recording fixation variability, and other ophthalmic examination tools.
4:Experimental Procedures and Operational Workflow:
Participants underwent standard automated perimetry under three fixation conditions in a randomized order. Fixation variability was recorded and analyzed using the bivariate contour ellipse area.
5:Data Analysis Methods:
Statistical analysis was performed using MedCalc, R statistical software, and G*Power3. Paired t-tests and Pearson’s correlation coefficient were used for comparisons and correlations, respectively.
独家科研数据包,助您复现前沿成果,加速创新突破
获取完整内容