Suppr超能文献

通过数码摄影估计瞳孔大小。

Estimation of pupil size by digital photography.

作者信息

Twa Michael D, Bailey Melissa D, Hayes John, Bullimore Mark

机构信息

Ohio State University College of Optometry, Columbus, OH 43210-1240, USA.

出版信息

J Cataract Refract Surg. 2004 Feb;30(2):381-9. doi: 10.1016/S0886-3350(03)00619-9.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate a digital photography method of pupil size estimation over a broad range of illumination conditions and to compare this method with common clinical techniques.

SETTING

College of Optometry, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.

METHODS

Two examiners measured the pupil diameter in 45 right eyes at 3 illumination levels: <0.63 lux (dark), 5 lux (dim), and 1000 lux (bright). Estimation by infrared video recording, the reference standard, was compared with measurements by digital photography, ruler, semicircular templates, and the Colvard pupillometer. Masked graders measured pupil size from infrared video recordings and digital photographs.

RESULTS

The repeatability of the measurement method determined by the mean intraclass correlation coefficients was highest for video recording across conditions (0.86-0.97), followed by digital photography (0.76-0.94), Colvard pupillometry (0.63-0.82), ruler (0.71-0.85), and templates (0.70-0.83). An analysis of variance showed a significant difference in pupil size by method (P<.001). All methods except digital photography estimated smaller pupil sizes under dark and dim illumination than infrared video measurements (all P<.01). Under bright illumination, the ruler measurements were significantly smaller (-0.15 mm) and the Colvard pupillometer measurements were greater (+0.30 mm) than the reference (P<.01). The 95% limits of agreement (LoA) between examiners were smallest for video measurements at all light levels. The remaining measures ranked from best to worst by 95% LoA were digital photography, Colvard pupillometry, ruler, and templates.

CONCLUSIONS

Estimation of pupil size by digital photography was more repeatable and accurate than estimates by common clinical techniques over a wide range of illumination. Although not as quick as other methods, digital photography is relatively inexpensive, permits lasting documentation, and allows independent grading suitable for clinical research purposes.

摘要

目的

评估在广泛照明条件下估计瞳孔大小的数码摄影方法,并将该方法与常见临床技术进行比较。

设置

美国俄亥俄州哥伦布市俄亥俄州立大学视光学院。

方法

两名检查者在三种照明水平下测量45只右眼的瞳孔直径:<0.63勒克斯(暗)、5勒克斯(昏暗)和1000勒克斯(明亮)。将作为参考标准的红外视频记录估计值与数码摄影、直尺、半圆形模板和科尔瓦德瞳孔计测量值进行比较。蒙面评分者从红外视频记录和数码照片中测量瞳孔大小。

结果

通过平均组内相关系数确定的测量方法的重复性,在各种条件下视频记录最高(0.86 - 0.97),其次是数码摄影(0.76 - 0.94)、科尔瓦德瞳孔测量法(0.63 - 0.82)、直尺(0.71 - 0.85)和模板(0.70 - 0.83)。方差分析显示,不同方法测量的瞳孔大小存在显著差异(P <.001)。除数码摄影外,所有方法在暗和昏暗照明下估计的瞳孔大小均小于红外视频测量值(所有P <.01)。在明亮照明下,直尺测量值显著更小(-0.15毫米),科尔瓦德瞳孔计测量值比参考值更大(+0.30毫米)(P <.01)。在所有光照水平下,检查者之间的95%一致性界限(LoA)对于视频测量最小。其余测量方法按95% LoA从最佳到最差排序依次为数码摄影、科尔瓦德瞳孔测量法、直尺和模板。

结论

在广泛的照明范围内,数码摄影估计瞳孔大小比常见临床技术更具重复性和准确性。虽然不如其他方法快捷,但数码摄影相对便宜,可进行永久性记录,并允许独立评分,适用于临床研究目的。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验