问题措辞和长波长锥体敏感性会影响健康患者的红帽测试反应吗?

Mark A. Kahrhoff , John Crane , Derek Wiles , Carl J. Bassi
{"title":"问题措辞和长波长锥体敏感性会影响健康患者的红帽测试反应吗?","authors":"Mark A. Kahrhoff ,&nbsp;John Crane ,&nbsp;Derek Wiles ,&nbsp;Carl J. Bassi","doi":"10.1016/j.ajoint.2024.100028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study investigates the influence of question phrasing and long wavelength cone sensitivity on red cap test responses in healthy patients. A chart review of 230 adult patients assessed responses to two different phrasings of the red cap test. Phrasing 1 asked the patient to describe the left eye relative to the right while Phrasing 2 asked the patient to name the brighter eye and provided an option for the patient to report no difference. Long wavelength cone thresholds were measured using the Konan CCT. Across both phrasings, 33 % of patients reported red saturation asymmetry, with a significant difference in positive responses between the two phrasings (43.6 % for Phrasing 1 vs. 11.3 % for Phrasing 2, (χ<sup>2</sup> = 121.694, <em>p &lt;</em> <em>.</em>001). No significant interocular differences in long wavelength cone sensitivity were found in those patients with a positive red cap response. Phrasing contributes to the high false positive rate of the red cap test reported in healthy patients.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100071,"journal":{"name":"AJO International","volume":"1 2","pages":"Article 100028"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950253524000285/pdfft?md5=a5f5f7e73bb0cd8da8188f130866010b&pid=1-s2.0-S2950253524000285-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do question phrasing and long wavelength cone sensitivity influence red cap test responses in healthy patients?\",\"authors\":\"Mark A. Kahrhoff ,&nbsp;John Crane ,&nbsp;Derek Wiles ,&nbsp;Carl J. Bassi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ajoint.2024.100028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This study investigates the influence of question phrasing and long wavelength cone sensitivity on red cap test responses in healthy patients. A chart review of 230 adult patients assessed responses to two different phrasings of the red cap test. Phrasing 1 asked the patient to describe the left eye relative to the right while Phrasing 2 asked the patient to name the brighter eye and provided an option for the patient to report no difference. Long wavelength cone thresholds were measured using the Konan CCT. Across both phrasings, 33 % of patients reported red saturation asymmetry, with a significant difference in positive responses between the two phrasings (43.6 % for Phrasing 1 vs. 11.3 % for Phrasing 2, (χ<sup>2</sup> = 121.694, <em>p &lt;</em> <em>.</em>001). No significant interocular differences in long wavelength cone sensitivity were found in those patients with a positive red cap response. Phrasing contributes to the high false positive rate of the red cap test reported in healthy patients.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJO International\",\"volume\":\"1 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 100028\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950253524000285/pdfft?md5=a5f5f7e73bb0cd8da8188f130866010b&pid=1-s2.0-S2950253524000285-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJO International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950253524000285\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJO International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950253524000285","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究调查了问题措辞和长波长锥体敏感度对健康患者红帽测试反应的影响。我们对 230 名成年患者进行了病历审查,评估了他们对红帽测试两种不同措辞的反应。措辞 1 要求患者描述左眼相对于右眼的情况,而措辞 2 则要求患者说出较亮的那只眼睛的名称,并为患者提供了报告无差异的选项。使用 Konan CCT 测量了长波长锥体阈值。在两种措辞中,33% 的患者报告了红色饱和度不对称,两种措辞之间的阳性反应差异显著(措辞 1 为 43.6%,措辞 2 为 11.3%,χ2 = 121.694,p <.001)。在红帽反应呈阳性的患者中,长波长锥体灵敏度没有发现明显的眼间差异。据报道,健康患者的红帽测试假阳性率较高的原因是用词不当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do question phrasing and long wavelength cone sensitivity influence red cap test responses in healthy patients?

This study investigates the influence of question phrasing and long wavelength cone sensitivity on red cap test responses in healthy patients. A chart review of 230 adult patients assessed responses to two different phrasings of the red cap test. Phrasing 1 asked the patient to describe the left eye relative to the right while Phrasing 2 asked the patient to name the brighter eye and provided an option for the patient to report no difference. Long wavelength cone thresholds were measured using the Konan CCT. Across both phrasings, 33 % of patients reported red saturation asymmetry, with a significant difference in positive responses between the two phrasings (43.6 % for Phrasing 1 vs. 11.3 % for Phrasing 2, (χ2 = 121.694, p < .001). No significant interocular differences in long wavelength cone sensitivity were found in those patients with a positive red cap response. Phrasing contributes to the high false positive rate of the red cap test reported in healthy patients.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信