Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 144
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 144
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 212
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1002
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3142
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of fixation target parameters on fixation instability in strabismic monkeys.
Methods: One normal and three exotropic monkeys were presented with four differently shaped fixation targets, with three diameters, during monocular or binocular viewing. Fixation targets were white on a black background or vice versa. Binocular eye movements were recorded using the magnetic search coil technique and fixation stability quantified by calculating the bivariate contour ellipse area (BCEA).
Results: Fixation instability was greater in all the strabismic monkeys compared with the normal monkey. During monocular viewing, strabismic monkeys showed significantly greater instability in the covered eye compared to the fixating eye. Multifactorial ANOVA suggested statistically significant target parameter influences, although effect sizes were small. Thus, a disk-shaped target resulted in greater instability than other target shapes in the viewing eyes of the normal monkey and two of three strabismic monkeys. A similar target-shape effect was also observed in the covered eye. Least instability was elicited with a 0.5° target in the normal monkey and a 1.0° target in the strabismic monkeys, both in the viewing and the covered eye. Target/background polarity effects were idiosyncratic. In strabismic monkeys, stability of the fixating eye during binocular viewing was not different from the stability of the same eye during monocular viewing.
Conclusions: Abnormal drifts and nystagmus contribute to increased fixation instability in strabismic monkeys. Target parameters (shape and size) that influence fixation stability in a normal animal also affected fixation stability in our sample of strabismic monkeys.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4790473 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/iovs.15-17896 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!