↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Psychophysical measures of visual function and everyday perceptual experience in a case of congenital stationary night blindness

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Psychophysical measures of visual function and everyday perceptual experience in a case of congenital stationary night blindness
Published in
Clinical Ophthalmology, August 2016
DOI 10.2147/opth.s99593
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jocelyn Cammack, John Whight, Vinette Cross, Andrew T Rider, Andrew R Webster, Andrew Stockman

Abstract

An appreciation of the relation between laboratory measures of visual deficit and everyday perceptual experience is fundamental to understanding the impact of a visual condition on patients and so to a fuller characterization of the disorder. This study aims to understand better the interpretative processes by which modified sensory information is perceived by a patient with congenital stationary night blindness and the adaptive strategies that are devised to deal with their measurable visual loss. Psychophysical measurements of temporal resolution, spectral sensitivity, and color discrimination were conducted on a 78-year-old male patient with the condition, who was also interviewed at length about the ways in which his diagnosis affected his daily life. Narrative analysis was employed to identify the relation between his subjective perceptual experiences and functional deficits in identifiable components of the visual system. Psychophysical measurements indicated a complete lack of rod perception and substantially reduced cone sensitivity. Two particular effects of this visual loss emerged during interviews: 1) the development of navigational techniques that relied on light reflections and point sources of light and 2) a reluctance to disclose the extent of visual loss and resulting lifelong psychosocial consequences. This study demonstrates the valuable complementary role that rich descriptive patient testimony can play, in conjunction with laboratory and clinical measurements, in more fully characterizing a disorder and in reaching a more complete understanding of the experience of vision loss. It also evidences the particular suitability of filmmaking techniques as a means of accessing and communicating subjective patient experience.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Other 6 20%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 5 17%
Linguistics 4 13%
Neuroscience 4 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 6 20%
Unknown 6 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 October 2016.
All research outputs
#14,600,874
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Ophthalmology
#1,036
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,842
of 381,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Ophthalmology
#24
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 381,029 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.