The Experts below are selected from a list of 279 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
H Laidlaw - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
technical note the effect of refractive blur on colour vision evaluated using the cambridge colour test the ishihara pseudoisochromatic plates and the farnsworth munsell 100 hue test
Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 2007Co-Authors: Sri Thyagarajan, Philip Moradi, Luke Membrey, D Alistair, H LaidlawAbstract:The results of a prospective study examining the effect of refractive blur on colour vision performance in normal subjects measured with three different colour vision tests are reported. The Farnsworth Munsell 100 Hue (FM100) and Cambridge Colour Test (CCT) results were significantly affected at +6 D of spherical refractive blur, whereas those from the Ishihara Pseudoisochromatic Plate (IPP) test were not. In a clinical setting, correction of refractive error up to 3 D for colour vision testing with these tests may not be required. Poor colour vision should not be attributed solely to refractive causes of poor visual acuity (Snellen equivalent: >6/36). Fastest test times were achieved using IPP, followed by CCT.
Phuong Pham - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the chromagen contact lens system colour vision test results and subjective responses
Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 2001Co-Authors: Helen A Swarbrick, Phuong Nguyen, Tuyen Nguyen, Phuong PhamAbstract:The ChromaGen lens system is designed to enhance colour perception in colour vision deficiency (CVD). To investigate its efficacy, 14 CVD subjects were prescribed ChromaGen contact lenses. Colour vision tests (Ishihara, Farnsworth Munsell D-15, Farnsworth Lantern) were administered at baseline, lens dispensing, and after a 2-week lens-wearing trial during which subjective responses were recorded daily using visual analogue scales. ChromaGen lenses significantly reduced Ishihara error rates (p<0.001; ANOVA), particularly for deutan subjects. There was also a significant reduction in errors (p<0.005) on the D-15 test. Conversely, lens wear had no significant effect on Farnsworth Lantern test performance. Subjectively, subjects reported enhanced colour perception, but poor vision in dim light. Judgement of distance and motion were only slightly affected. We conclude that ChromaGen lenses may enhance subjective colour experience and assist in certain colour-related tasks, but are not indicated as an aid for CVD in occupations with colour vision-related restrictions.
Carol Lakkis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
can color vision defective subjects who pass the farnsworth lantern test recognize surface color codes
Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, 2007Co-Authors: Barry L Cole, Ka-yee Lian, Carol LakkisAbstract:INTRODUCTION: The International Civil Aviation Organization requires that pilots be able to distinguish the colors used in air navigation and in particular be able to identify the colors of signal lights. Most national aviation authorities use a lantern test to assess the ability of applicants for a pilot's license who have abnormal color vision to recognize the colors of signal lights. However, color-coding is now widely used in aviation systems other than signal lights. Color is used in tarmac markings, maps, manuals, and electronic flight instrument displays. These color codes can use 10 or more colors, many more than the 3 to 5 used for signal lights. This study investigated whether people with defective color vision (DCV) who pass the Farnsworth lantern test can recognize the main colors used for surface color codes. METHODS: There were 99 subjects with DCV who were tested using the Optec 900 version of the Farnsworth lantern test and also named the colors of a set of 10 surface colors that varied in shape (dots and lines) and size (3 sizes; angular diameters 0.27, 1.0, and 2.4 degrees; angular widths 0.14, 0.27, and 0.50 degrees). A control group of 20 subjects with normal color vision also named the surface colors. RESULTS: Of the DCV subjects, 19% passed the Farnsworth lantern test, of whom 74% made no errors with the surface colors. The other 26% made few errors (up to 5 errors in 120 presentations) and those errors were mostly to confuse red, orange, and brown. The subjects with normal color vision made no errors naming the surface colors. CONCLUSION: Those who pass the Farnsworth lantern test can recognize the colors of a 10-color surface color code with few or no errors. This is because the small (2.9-min arc) stimulus of the lantern test presents a more difficult task than the larger surface colors. Language: en
-
categorical color naming of surface color codes by people with abnormal color vision
Optometry and Vision Science, 2006Co-Authors: Ken Sharpe, Carol LakkisAbstract:PURPOSE Past investigations of the ability of people with color vision deficiency (CVD) to name the colors of surface colors have been occupation-specific. This study was undertaken as a more generalized investigation to explore particularly the effects of stimulus size and shape. METHODS One hundred CVD observers and 20 color vision normal (CVN) subjects named the colors of two sets of surface colors, each set presenting the same 10 colors (red, orange, brown, yellow, green, blue, purple, white, gray, black). One set presented dot stimuli in three sizes (2.4 degrees , 1.0 degrees , 0.27 degrees ) and the other line stimuli with three widths (0.50 degrees , 0.27 degrees , 0.14 degrees ). Color vision was diagnosed using the Ishihara test, the Farnsworth D15 test, the Medmont C100, and the Nagel anomaloscope. RESULTS All CVN subjects and 37% of CVD subjects made no errors. Type of CVD and stimulus size were significant factors for probability of error and the effect of stimulus size is best described by 1/area. There were significant interactions between CVD type and 1/area and between shape and 1/area. Deuteranomals who passed the Farnsworth D15 test made significantly fewer errors than all other CVD types and 70% made no errors. Their common errors were to confuse red, orange, and brown. Protanomals who passed the Farnsworth D15 test made fewer errors than dichromats. CONCLUSIONS Mild deuteranomals will make very few errors with a seven-color code that omits orange, brown, and purple and will make very few errors (approximately 0.3%) with a 10-color code when the stimuli are reasonably large (area >20 mm).
-
color vision assessment fail rates of two versions of the farnsworth lantern test
Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, 2006Co-Authors: Barry L Cole, Ka-yee Lian, Carol LakkisAbstract:Introduction: The Farnsworth lantern test has long been used to assess the color vision of those seeking to enter the aviation industry and other occupations that require recognition of signal lights. A new version of the Farnsworth lantern, the Optec 900, is now produced because the original version is no longer manufactured. This paper reports the pass/ fail rates of a production model of the new version compared with an original one. Methods: There were 100 male subjects with abnormal color vision who were given 3 runs with each lantern test. Their color vision deficiency was diagnosed using a battery of tests including the D15 test and the Nagel anomaloscope. Results: A total of 19% passed the new lantern test compared with 24% for the original Farnsworth using the usual fail criteria. The pass rates become 17% and 21%, respectively, when adjusted for the expected proportions of the types of abnormal color vision. There was agreement between the two lantern tests for 89% of subjects: 8% passed the old Farnsworth and failed the new version, and 3% failed the original Farnsworth and passed the new. There was a practice effect: when one lantern was passed and the other failed, the lantern passed was, with one exception, given second. Both lantern tests passed subjects who made no errors on the first run who subsequently made many errors when given further runs. Only 4% of subjects made no errors on all runs. Conclusion: The Optec 900 can be considered equivalent to the Farnsworth lantern and might be preferred because it is slightly more stringent, reducing the risk of passing those who will make errors with signal lights. The practice of passing applicants who make no errors on the first run should be abandoned since 10% of those who pass in this way make many errors when additional runs are given.
-
the new richmond hrr pseudoisochromatic test for colour vision is better than the ishihara test
Clinical and Experimental Optometry, 2006Co-Authors: Barry L Cole, Ka-yee Lian, Carol LakkisAbstract:Aim: The Hardy-Rand-Rittler (HRR) pseudoisochromatic test for colour vision is highly regarded but has long been out of print. Richmond Products produced a new edition in 2002 that has been re-engineered to rectify shortcomings of the original test. This study is a validation trial of the new test using a larger sample and different criteria of evaluation from those of the previously reported validation study. Methods: The Richmond HRR test was given to 100 consecutively presenting patients with abnormal colour vision and 50 patients with normal colour vision. Colour vision was diagnosed using the Ishihara test, the Farnsworth D15 test, the Medmont C-100 test and the Type 1 Nagel anomaloscope. Results: The Richmond HRR test has a sensitivity of 1.00 and a specificity of 0.975 when the criterion for failing is two or more errors with the screening plates. Sensitivity and specificity become 0.98 and 1.0, respectively, when the fail criterion is three or more errors. Those with red-green colour vision deficiency were correctly classified as protan or deutan on 86 per cent of occasions, with 11 per cent unclassified and three per cent incorrectly classified. All those graded as having a ‘mild’ defect by the Richmond HRR test passed the Farnsworth D15 test and had an anomaloscope range of 30 or less. Not all dichromats were classified as ‘strong’, which was one of the goals of the re-engineering and those graded as ‘medium’ and ‘strong’ included dichromats and those who have a mild colour vision deficiency based on the results of the Farnsworth D15 test and the anomaloscope range. Conclusions: The test is as good as the Ishihara test for detection of the red-green colour vision deficiencies but unlike the Ishihara, also has plates for the detection of the tritan defects. Its classification of protans and deutans is useful but the Medmont C-100 test is better. Those graded as ‘mild’ by the Richmond HRR test can be regarded as having a mild colour vision defect but a ‘medium’ or ‘strong’ grading needs to be interpreted in conjunction with other tests such as the Farnsworth D15 and the anomaloscope. The Richmond HRR test could be the test of choice for clinicians who wish to use a single test for colour vision.
Sri Thyagarajan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
technical note the effect of refractive blur on colour vision evaluated using the cambridge colour test the ishihara pseudoisochromatic plates and the farnsworth munsell 100 hue test
Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics, 2007Co-Authors: Sri Thyagarajan, Philip Moradi, Luke Membrey, D Alistair, H LaidlawAbstract:The results of a prospective study examining the effect of refractive blur on colour vision performance in normal subjects measured with three different colour vision tests are reported. The Farnsworth Munsell 100 Hue (FM100) and Cambridge Colour Test (CCT) results were significantly affected at +6 D of spherical refractive blur, whereas those from the Ishihara Pseudoisochromatic Plate (IPP) test were not. In a clinical setting, correction of refractive error up to 3 D for colour vision testing with these tests may not be required. Poor colour vision should not be attributed solely to refractive causes of poor visual acuity (Snellen equivalent: >6/36). Fastest test times were achieved using IPP, followed by CCT.
Sourabh Sharma - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a new computer based farnsworth munsell 100 hue test for evaluation of color vision
International Ophthalmology, 2014Co-Authors: Supriyo Ghose, Twinkle Parmar, Tanuj Dada, Murugesan Vanathi, Sourabh SharmaAbstract:To evaluate a computer-based Farnsworth-Munsell (FM) 100-hue test and compare it with a manual FM 100-hue test in normal and congenital color-deficient individuals. Fifty color defective subjects and 200 normal subjects with a best-corrected visual acuity ≥6/12 were compared using a standard manual FM 100-hue test and a computer-based FM 100-hue test under standard operating conditions as recommended by the manufacturer after initial trial testing. Parameters evaluated were total error scores (TES), type of defect and testing time. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to determine the relationship between the test scores. Cohen’s kappa was used to assess agreement of color defect classification between the two tests. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to determine the optimal cut-off score for the computer-based FM 100-hue test. The mean time was 16 ± 1.5 (range 6–20) min for the manual FM 100-hue test and 7.4 ± 1.4 (range 5–13) min for the computer-based FM 100-hue test, thus reducing testing time to <50 % (p < 0.05). For grading color discrimination, Pearson’s correlation coefficient for TES between the two tests was 0.91 (p < 0.001). For color defect classification, Cohen’s agreement coefficient was 0.98 (p < 0.01). The computer-based FM 100-hue is an effective and rapid method for detecting, classifying and grading color vision anomalies.
