Pattern of reading eye movements during monovision contact lens wear in presbyopes
Abstract Monovision can be used as a method to correct presbyopia with contact lenses (CL) but its effect on reading behavior is still poorly understood. In this study eye movements (EM) were recorded in fifteen presbyopic participants, naïve to monovision, whilst they read arrays of words, non-word...
Guardado en:
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | article |
Lenguaje: | EN |
Publicado: |
Nature Portfolio
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/1a23d9c04a534c339bf0602a8395be55 |
Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
id |
oai:doaj.org-article:1a23d9c04a534c339bf0602a8395be55 |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
oai:doaj.org-article:1a23d9c04a534c339bf0602a8395be552021-12-02T11:40:36ZPattern of reading eye movements during monovision contact lens wear in presbyopes10.1038/s41598-018-33934-62045-2322https://doaj.org/article/1a23d9c04a534c339bf0602a8395be552018-10-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-33934-6https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract Monovision can be used as a method to correct presbyopia with contact lenses (CL) but its effect on reading behavior is still poorly understood. In this study eye movements (EM) were recorded in fifteen presbyopic participants, naïve to monovision, whilst they read arrays of words, non-words, and text passages to assess whether monovision affected their reading. Three conditions were compared, using daily disposable CLs: baseline (near correction in both eyes), conventional monovision (distance correction in the dominant eye, near correction in the non-dominant eye), and crossed monovision (the reversal of conventional monovision). Behavioral measures (reading speed and accuracy) and EM parameters (single fixation duration, number of fixations, dwell time per item, percentage of regressions, and percentage of skipped items) were analyzed. When reading passages, no differences in behavioral and EM measures were seen in any comparison of the three conditions. The number of fixations and dwell time significantly increased for both monovision and crossed monovision with respect to baseline only with word and non-word arrays. It appears that monovision did not appreciably alter visual processing when reading meaningful texts but some limited stress of the EM pattern was observed only with arrays of unrelated or meaningless items under monovision, which require the reader to have more in-depth controlled visual processing.Fabrizio ZeriShehzad A. NarooPierluigi ZoccolottiMaria De LucaNature PortfolioarticleMonovisionText PassagesFixation DurationPresbyopia CorrectionReading SpeedMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 8, Iss 1, Pp 1-9 (2018) |
institution |
DOAJ |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
EN |
topic |
Monovision Text Passages Fixation Duration Presbyopia Correction Reading Speed Medicine R Science Q |
spellingShingle |
Monovision Text Passages Fixation Duration Presbyopia Correction Reading Speed Medicine R Science Q Fabrizio Zeri Shehzad A. Naroo Pierluigi Zoccolotti Maria De Luca Pattern of reading eye movements during monovision contact lens wear in presbyopes |
description |
Abstract Monovision can be used as a method to correct presbyopia with contact lenses (CL) but its effect on reading behavior is still poorly understood. In this study eye movements (EM) were recorded in fifteen presbyopic participants, naïve to monovision, whilst they read arrays of words, non-words, and text passages to assess whether monovision affected their reading. Three conditions were compared, using daily disposable CLs: baseline (near correction in both eyes), conventional monovision (distance correction in the dominant eye, near correction in the non-dominant eye), and crossed monovision (the reversal of conventional monovision). Behavioral measures (reading speed and accuracy) and EM parameters (single fixation duration, number of fixations, dwell time per item, percentage of regressions, and percentage of skipped items) were analyzed. When reading passages, no differences in behavioral and EM measures were seen in any comparison of the three conditions. The number of fixations and dwell time significantly increased for both monovision and crossed monovision with respect to baseline only with word and non-word arrays. It appears that monovision did not appreciably alter visual processing when reading meaningful texts but some limited stress of the EM pattern was observed only with arrays of unrelated or meaningless items under monovision, which require the reader to have more in-depth controlled visual processing. |
format |
article |
author |
Fabrizio Zeri Shehzad A. Naroo Pierluigi Zoccolotti Maria De Luca |
author_facet |
Fabrizio Zeri Shehzad A. Naroo Pierluigi Zoccolotti Maria De Luca |
author_sort |
Fabrizio Zeri |
title |
Pattern of reading eye movements during monovision contact lens wear in presbyopes |
title_short |
Pattern of reading eye movements during monovision contact lens wear in presbyopes |
title_full |
Pattern of reading eye movements during monovision contact lens wear in presbyopes |
title_fullStr |
Pattern of reading eye movements during monovision contact lens wear in presbyopes |
title_full_unstemmed |
Pattern of reading eye movements during monovision contact lens wear in presbyopes |
title_sort |
pattern of reading eye movements during monovision contact lens wear in presbyopes |
publisher |
Nature Portfolio |
publishDate |
2018 |
url |
https://doaj.org/article/1a23d9c04a534c339bf0602a8395be55 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT fabriziozeri patternofreadingeyemovementsduringmonovisioncontactlenswearinpresbyopes AT shehzadanaroo patternofreadingeyemovementsduringmonovisioncontactlenswearinpresbyopes AT pierluigizoccolotti patternofreadingeyemovementsduringmonovisioncontactlenswearinpresbyopes AT mariadeluca patternofreadingeyemovementsduringmonovisioncontactlenswearinpresbyopes |
_version_ |
1718395566124171264 |