传统与基于虚拟现实的Hess-Lancaster评估:眼动评估的一致性和可重复性。

IF 2.2 4区 心理学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Francisco Javier Povedano-Montero, Álvaro Perales-Serrano, Daniela León Lobo, Rut González-Jiménez, Ricardo Bernárdez-Vilaboa, Juan E Cedrún-Sánchez
{"title":"传统与基于虚拟现实的Hess-Lancaster评估:眼动评估的一致性和可重复性。","authors":"Francisco Javier Povedano-Montero, Álvaro Perales-Serrano, Daniela León Lobo, Rut González-Jiménez, Ricardo Bernárdez-Vilaboa, Juan E Cedrún-Sánchez","doi":"10.3390/jemr19030067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The conventional Hess-Lancaster test is widely used to assess ocular misalignment across diagnostic gaze positions, but it relies on subjective responses and manual recording. Virtual reality may provide a more standardized framework for ocular motility assessment.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the agreement and within-method repeatability of point-by-point deviation measurements obtained with the conventional Hess-Lancaster test and a VR-based Hess-Lancaster assessment implemented in Dicopt Pro.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional observational study included 52 adults with suspected or diagnosed ocular motility disorders. Participants underwent both assessments using the same predefined gaze positions. Agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis, concordance correlation coefficients, mean absolute differences, and mixed-effects modeling. Repeatability was evaluated in a subset with repeated measurements using session-to-session differences and intraclass correlation coefficients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The VR-based assessment showed moderate agreement with the conventional test, with a mean concordance correlation coefficient of 0.57 for both eyes. Mean bias was 1.22 prism diopters for the right eye and 0.10 prism diopters for the left eye. Repeatability estimates were moderate-to-good, with ICC values ranging from 0.62 to 0.83, although repeated measurements were available only in a subset of participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The VR-based Hess-Lancaster assessment showed small mean differences and moderate agreement with the conventional test, although both methods should be interpreted within the context of the complete clinical examination.</p>","PeriodicalId":15813,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eye Movement Research","volume":"19 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13302422/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conventional Versus Virtual Reality-Based Hess-Lancaster Assessment: Agreement and Repeatability in Ocular Motility Evaluation.\",\"authors\":\"Francisco Javier Povedano-Montero, Álvaro Perales-Serrano, Daniela León Lobo, Rut González-Jiménez, Ricardo Bernárdez-Vilaboa, Juan E Cedrún-Sánchez\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/jemr19030067\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The conventional Hess-Lancaster test is widely used to assess ocular misalignment across diagnostic gaze positions, but it relies on subjective responses and manual recording. Virtual reality may provide a more standardized framework for ocular motility assessment.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the agreement and within-method repeatability of point-by-point deviation measurements obtained with the conventional Hess-Lancaster test and a VR-based Hess-Lancaster assessment implemented in Dicopt Pro.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional observational study included 52 adults with suspected or diagnosed ocular motility disorders. Participants underwent both assessments using the same predefined gaze positions. Agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis, concordance correlation coefficients, mean absolute differences, and mixed-effects modeling. Repeatability was evaluated in a subset with repeated measurements using session-to-session differences and intraclass correlation coefficients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The VR-based assessment showed moderate agreement with the conventional test, with a mean concordance correlation coefficient of 0.57 for both eyes. Mean bias was 1.22 prism diopters for the right eye and 0.10 prism diopters for the left eye. Repeatability estimates were moderate-to-good, with ICC values ranging from 0.62 to 0.83, although repeated measurements were available only in a subset of participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The VR-based Hess-Lancaster assessment showed small mean differences and moderate agreement with the conventional test, although both methods should be interpreted within the context of the complete clinical examination.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15813,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Eye Movement Research\",\"volume\":\"19 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13302422/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Eye Movement Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/jemr19030067\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Eye Movement Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jemr19030067","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:传统的Hess-Lancaster测试被广泛用于评估诊断性凝视位置的眼部错位,但它依赖于主观反应和人工记录。虚拟现实可以为眼动评估提供一个更加标准化的框架。目的:评估通过传统的Hess-Lancaster测试和在Dicopt Pro中实施的基于vr的Hess-Lancaster评估获得的逐点偏差测量的一致性和方法内可重复性。方法:这项横断面观察性研究包括52名疑似或诊断为眼动障碍的成年人。参与者使用相同的预定义凝视位置进行两种评估。使用Bland-Altman分析、一致性相关系数、平均绝对差异和混合效应建模来评估一致性。可重复性在一个子集中进行评估,使用会话间差异和类内相关系数进行重复测量。结果:基于vr的评估与常规测试的一致性中等,双眼的平均一致性相关系数为0.57。平均偏压为右眼1.22棱镜屈光度,左眼0.10棱镜屈光度。可重复性估计为中等至良好,ICC值范围为0.62至0.83,尽管重复测量仅在一小部分参与者中可用。结论:基于vr的Hess-Lancaster评估与常规测试的平均差异较小,一致性中等,尽管这两种方法都应在完整的临床检查背景下进行解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Conventional Versus Virtual Reality-Based Hess-Lancaster Assessment: Agreement and Repeatability in Ocular Motility Evaluation.

Background: The conventional Hess-Lancaster test is widely used to assess ocular misalignment across diagnostic gaze positions, but it relies on subjective responses and manual recording. Virtual reality may provide a more standardized framework for ocular motility assessment.

Objectives: To evaluate the agreement and within-method repeatability of point-by-point deviation measurements obtained with the conventional Hess-Lancaster test and a VR-based Hess-Lancaster assessment implemented in Dicopt Pro.

Methods: This cross-sectional observational study included 52 adults with suspected or diagnosed ocular motility disorders. Participants underwent both assessments using the same predefined gaze positions. Agreement was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis, concordance correlation coefficients, mean absolute differences, and mixed-effects modeling. Repeatability was evaluated in a subset with repeated measurements using session-to-session differences and intraclass correlation coefficients.

Results: The VR-based assessment showed moderate agreement with the conventional test, with a mean concordance correlation coefficient of 0.57 for both eyes. Mean bias was 1.22 prism diopters for the right eye and 0.10 prism diopters for the left eye. Repeatability estimates were moderate-to-good, with ICC values ranging from 0.62 to 0.83, although repeated measurements were available only in a subset of participants.

Conclusions: The VR-based Hess-Lancaster assessment showed small mean differences and moderate agreement with the conventional test, although both methods should be interpreted within the context of the complete clinical examination.

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
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
33.30%
发文量
10
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Eye Movement Research is an open-access, peer-reviewed scientific periodical devoted to all aspects of oculomotor functioning including methodology of eye recording, neurophysiological and cognitive models, attention, reading, as well as applications in neurology, ergonomy, media research and other areas,
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书