Yee L
J Am Optom Assoc. 1981 Jul;52(7):579-82.
Thirteen subjects, 11 males and 2 females, from 24 to 35 years of age, were tested at the nearpoint. Three testing procedures, the Mallett near unit, the traditional examination technique, and the Borish nearpoint card, were performed. Results were analyzed to see whether a significant difference exists between the 3 types of nearpoint testing techniques. The Borish card differed significantly from the traditional technique (p less than .05) on tests of visual acuity, unfused crossed cylinder and fused cross cylinder. Donder's amplitude of accommodation on the Mallett unit and on the Borish card differed significantly (p less than .05). No significant difference was noted with the traditional technique versus the Borish card on tests of lateral phoria, vertical phoria, and vergences, or between the Mellett and Borish test on lateral associated phorias, vertical associated phorias, fine suppression, balance of sphere at near and cylinder power at near. Gross suppression was found in 2 of 26 measurements on the Mallett tests. No subjects indicated gross suppression on the Borish card.
对13名年龄在24至35岁之间的受试者（11名男性和2名女性）进行了近点测试。采用了三种测试程序，即马利特近用视标、传统检查技术和博里什近点卡。对结果进行分析，以查看这三种近点测试技术之间是否存在显著差异。在视力、未融合交叉柱镜和融合交叉柱镜测试中，博里什卡与传统技术存在显著差异（p小于0.05）。马利特视标仪和博里什近点卡上的杜安调节幅度存在显著差异（p小于0.05）。在水平隐斜、垂直隐斜和聚散度测试中，传统技术与博里什卡之间没有显著差异，在水平关联隐斜、垂直关联隐斜、精细抑制、近点球镜平衡和近点柱镜度数测试中，马利特视标仪和博里什卡测试之间也没有显著差异。在马利特测试的26次测量中有2次发现了明显抑制。在博里什近点卡测试中，没有受试者表示有明显抑制。
