New England College of Optometry, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2021 Nov;41(6):1183-1197. doi: 10.1111/opo.12881. Epub 2021 Sep 14.
Dynamic text presentation methods may improve reading ability in patients with central vision loss (CVL) by eliminating the need for accurate eye movements. We compared rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) and horizontal scrolling text presentation (scrolling) on reading rate and reading acuity in CVL observers and normally-sighted controls with simulated CVL (simCVL).
CVL observers' (n = 11) central scotomas and preferred retinal loci (PRL) for each eye were determined with MAIA microperimetry and fixation analysis. SimCVL controls (n = 16) used 4° inferior eccentric viewing, enforced with an Eyelink eye-tracker. Observers read aloud 4-word phrases randomly drawn from the MNREAD sentences. Six font sizes (0.50-1.30 logMAR) were tested with the better near acuity eye and both eyes of CVL observers. Three font sizes (0.50-1.00 logMAR) were tested binocularly in simCVL controls. Text presentation duration of each word for RSVP or drift speed for scrolling was varied to determine reading rate, defined as 50% of words read correctly. In a subset of CVL observers (n = 7), relationships between PRL eccentricity, reading threshold and rate were explored.
SimCVL controls demonstrated significantly faster reading rates for RSVP than scrolling text (p < 0.0001), and there was a significant main effect of font size (p < 0.0001). CVL patients demonstrated no significant differences in binocular reading rate between font sizes (p = 0.12) and text presentation (p = 0.25). Similar results were seen under monocular conditions. Reading acuity for RSVP and scrolling worsened with increasing PRL eccentricity (μ = 4.5°, p = 0.07). RSVP reading rate decreased significantly with increasing eccentricity (p = 0.02).
Consistent with previous work, reading acuity worsened with increasing PRL eccentricity. RSVP and scrolling text presentations significantly affected reading rate in simCVL, but not in CVL observers, suggesting that simCVL results may not generalise to pathological CVL.
动态文本呈现方法可以通过消除对准确眼球运动的需求来提高中央视力丧失（CVL）患者的阅读能力。我们比较了快速连续视觉呈现（RSVP）和水平滚动文本呈现（滚动）在 CVL 观察者和模拟 CVL（simCVL）的正常视力对照者的阅读速度和阅读锐度上的效果。
使用 MAIA 微视野计和注视分析确定 CVL 观察者（n=11）的中央暗点和每只眼的最佳视网膜位置（PRL）。模拟 CVL 对照者（n=16）使用 4°下偏心注视，通过 Eyelink 眼动追踪器强制进行。观察者大声朗读从 MNREAD 句子中随机抽取的 4 个单词短语。使用 CVL 观察者的较好近视力眼和双眼测试了六个字体大小（0.50-1.30 logMAR）。在 simCVL 对照者中，双眼测试了三个字体大小（0.50-1.00 logMAR）。RSVP 或滚动的每个单词的文本呈现持续时间或漂移速度各不相同，以确定阅读速度，定义为正确阅读的单词的 50%。在 CVL 观察者的一个子集中（n=7），探索了 PRL 偏心、阅读阈值和阅读率之间的关系。
simCVL 对照者的 RSVP 阅读速度明显快于滚动文本（p<0.0001），字体大小有显著的主效应（p<0.0001）。CVL 患者在字体大小（p=0.12）和文本呈现（p=0.25）之间没有表现出双眼阅读率的显著差异。在单眼条件下也观察到了类似的结果。随着 PRL 偏心度的增加，RSVP 和滚动的阅读锐度恶化（μ=4.5°，p=0.07）。RSVP 的阅读速度随偏心度的增加而显著下降（p=0.02）。
与之前的研究一致，随着 PRL 偏心度的增加，阅读锐度恶化。RSVP 和滚动文本呈现显著影响了 simCVL 中的阅读速度，但对 CVL 观察者没有影响，这表明 simCVL 的结果可能不适用于病理性 CVL。
