Show item record

dc.contributor.authorPolevoy, Claudia
dc.contributor.authorMuckle, Gina
dc.contributor.authorSéguin, Jean
dc.contributor.authorOuellet, Emmanuel
dc.contributor.authorSaint-Amour, Dave
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-24T16:27:49Z
dc.date.availableNO_RESTRICTIONfr
dc.date.available2018-09-24T16:27:49Z
dc.date.issued2017-04
dc.identifier.urihttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10633-017-9576-z
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1866/20915
dc.publisherSpringerfr
dc.subjectVisual acuityfr
dc.subjectTeller acuity cardsfr
dc.subjectSweep visual evoked potentialsfr
dc.subjectInfantfr
dc.titleSimilarities and differences between behavioral and electrophysiological visual acuity thresholds in healthy infants during the second half of the first year of lifefr
dc.typeArticlefr
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversité de Montréal. Faculté de médecine. Département de psychiatrie et d'addictologiefr
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s10633-017-9576-z
dcterms.abstractPurpose Behavioral and electrophysiological methods for visual acuity estimation typically correlate well in children and adult populations, but this relationship remains unclear in infants, particularly during the second half of the first year of life. It has been suggested that the agreement between both methods mostly relies on age and/or subjective acuity factors. The present study aimed at comparing acuity thresholds obtained with both approaches in a sample of healthy infants in a relatively narrow age range, that is 6–10 months old. Methods Acuity thresholds were assessed in 61 healthy infants aged between 6 and 10 months using the Teller acuity cards (TAC) and sweep visual evoked potentials (sVEP). The TAC stimuli (stationary vertical gratings displayed on laminated cards) ranged from 0.31 to 38 cycles per degree (cpd). The TAC acuity threshold was estimated according to the highest spatial frequency scored by the experimenter as seen by the infant. The sVEP stimuli (high-contrast vertical gratings counter-phased at 12 reversals/s) ranged from 13.5 to 1 cpd. sVEP were recorded at Oz and acuity threshold was estimated using regression linear fitting. Results Considering the entire sample, sVEP acuity thresholds (8.97 ± 2.52 cpd) were significantly better than TAC scores (5.58 ± 2.95 cpd), although the difference was within 1 octave for 64% of the infants. Neither Pearson nor intra-class correlations between the two methods were significant (0.18 and 0.03, respectively). While age at assessment was not related to any dependent variable (TAC, sVEP, sVEP–TAC difference score), subjective (behavioral) acuity was found to underlie the difference between the two methods. The difference between sVEP and TAC scores decreased as a function of subjective acuity, and at the highest subjective acuity level (>10 cpd), TAC acuity slightly exceeded sVEP acuity. Conclusions The superiority of sVEP acuity often reported in the literature was evident in our infant sample when subjective acuity (TAC) was low or moderate, but not when it was high (>10 cpd). The relationship between the two estimation methods was not dependent on age, but on subjective acuity.fr
dcterms.isPartOfurn:ISSN:0012-4486fr
dcterms.languageengfr
UdeM.ReferenceFournieParDeposantPolevoy, C., Muckle, G., Séguin, J. R., Ouellet, E. & Saint-Amour, D. (2017) Similarities and differences between behavioral and electrophysiological visual acuity thresholds in healthy infants during the second half of the first year of life. Documenta Ophtalmologica, 134(2), 99-110.fr
UdeM.VersionRioxxVersion acceptée / Accepted Manuscriptfr
oaire.citationTitleDocumenta ophthalmologica
oaire.citationVolume134
oaire.citationIssue2
oaire.citationStartPage99
oaire.citationEndPage110


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show item record

This document disseminated on Papyrus is the exclusive property of the copyright holders and is protected by the Copyright Act (R.S.C. 1985, c. C-42). It may be used for fair dealing and non-commercial purposes, for private study or research, criticism and review as provided by law. For any other use, written authorization from the copyright holders is required.