Correlation between parameters estimated by the colour assessment and diagnosis and the Cambridge colour test in color discrimination evaluation

IF 1.5 4区心理学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES

Vision Research Pub Date : 2025-07-26 DOI:10.1016/j.visres.2025.108664

Joycianne Rodrigues Parente , Eliza Maria da Costa Brito Lacerda , Dora Fix Ventura , Paulo Roney Kilpp Goulart , Natália B. Dutra , Givago Silva Souza , Letícia Miquilini

{"title":"Correlation between parameters estimated by the colour assessment and diagnosis and the Cambridge colour test in color discrimination evaluation","authors":"Joycianne Rodrigues Parente , Eliza Maria da Costa Brito Lacerda , Dora Fix Ventura , Paulo Roney Kilpp Goulart , Natália B. Dutra , Givago Silva Souza , Letícia Miquilini","doi":"10.1016/j.visres.2025.108664","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The Colour Assessment and Diagnosis (CAD) and the Cambridge Colour Test (CCT) are computerized psychophysical tests widely used in the diagnosis of color vision deficiencies due to their high specificity and sensitivity. However, these tests differ substantially in the type of visual task, stimulus configuration, vectors, luminance, background composition, and presentation time. This study aimed to compare the evaluation parameters estimated by these tests in trichromatic and dichromatic individuals. A total of sixty-six participants (40 trichromats and 38 dichromat individuals −16 protans and 22 deutans; mean age: 26.3 ± 8.9 years) were evaluated. Color discrimination thresholds were fitted to elliptical functions, and parameters such as ellipse area, rotation angle, and the size of protan, deutan, and tritan vectors were analyzed. Results showed equivalence between the tests for: the deutan and tritan vector areas and sizes in the trichromat subgroup; tritan vector area and size in the protan subgroup; and protan and tritan vector sizes in the deutan subgroup. Differences in the central coordinates of the CAD and CCT tests and the spatial arrangement of vectors in the CIE 1976 color space (specific to the CCT test) may have influenced the results. Nonetheless, agreement was observed in the measures of ellipse area, rotation angle, and sizes of the protan and tritan vectors between the two tests. These findings suggest that, despite methodological differences, the CAD and CCT tests produce largely comparable results and can be considered complementary tools in the assessment of color discrimination in clinical and research settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23670,"journal":{"name":"Vision Research","volume":"235 ","pages":"Article 108664"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vision Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042698925001257","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Colour Assessment and Diagnosis (CAD) and the Cambridge Colour Test (CCT) are computerized psychophysical tests widely used in the diagnosis of color vision deficiencies due to their high specificity and sensitivity. However, these tests differ substantially in the type of visual task, stimulus configuration, vectors, luminance, background composition, and presentation time. This study aimed to compare the evaluation parameters estimated by these tests in trichromatic and dichromatic individuals. A total of sixty-six participants (40 trichromats and 38 dichromat individuals −16 protans and 22 deutans; mean age: 26.3 ± 8.9 years) were evaluated. Color discrimination thresholds were fitted to elliptical functions, and parameters such as ellipse area, rotation angle, and the size of protan, deutan, and tritan vectors were analyzed. Results showed equivalence between the tests for: the deutan and tritan vector areas and sizes in the trichromat subgroup; tritan vector area and size in the protan subgroup; and protan and tritan vector sizes in the deutan subgroup. Differences in the central coordinates of the CAD and CCT tests and the spatial arrangement of vectors in the CIE 1976 color space (specific to the CCT test) may have influenced the results. Nonetheless, agreement was observed in the measures of ellipse area, rotation angle, and sizes of the protan and tritan vectors between the two tests. These findings suggest that, despite methodological differences, the CAD and CCT tests produce largely comparable results and can be considered complementary tools in the assessment of color discrimination in clinical and research settings.

查看原文本刊更多论文

色彩评价诊断参数与剑桥色彩测验在色彩判别评价中的相关性

色彩评估与诊断（CAD）和剑桥色彩测试（CCT）是计算机化的心理物理测试，因其高特异性和敏感性而广泛应用于色觉缺陷的诊断。然而，这些测试在视觉任务的类型、刺激配置、向量、亮度、背景组成和呈现时间上有很大的不同。本研究旨在比较这些测试在三色和二色个体中估计的评价参数。共有66名参与者（40名三色者和38名二色者）- 16名蛋白者和22名白种人；平均年龄：26.3±8.9岁)。将颜色判别阈值拟合到椭圆函数中，分析椭圆面积、旋转角度、protan、deutan、tritan矢量大小等参数。结果表明：三色亚群中德意志和三色载体面积和大小的测试之间是相等的；蛋白亚群中Tritan的矢量面积和大小；和蛋白质和三联蛋白载体大小在德意志亚群。CAD和CCT测试的中心坐标的差异以及CIE 1976颜色空间中向量的空间排列（特定于CCT测试）可能会影响结果。尽管如此，在两个测试之间的椭圆面积、旋转角度和蛋白和蛋白矢量的大小测量中观察到一致。这些发现表明，尽管方法上存在差异，但CAD和CCT测试产生的结果在很大程度上是相似的，可以被认为是临床和研究环境中评估颜色歧视的互补工具。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Vision Research 医学-神经科学

CiteScore

3.70

自引率

16.70%

发文量

111

审稿时长

66 days

期刊介绍： Vision Research is a journal devoted to the functional aspects of human, vertebrate and invertebrate vision and publishes experimental and observational studies, reviews, and theoretical and computational analyses. Vision Research also publishes clinical studies relevant to normal visual function and basic research relevant to visual dysfunction or its clinical investigation. Functional aspects of vision is interpreted broadly, ranging from molecular and cellular function to perception and behavior. Detailed descriptions are encouraged but enough introductory background should be included for non-specialists. Theoretical and computational papers should give a sense of order to the facts or point to new verifiable observations. Papers dealing with questions in the history of vision science should stress the development of ideas in the field.