Cargando…
The difference of distance stereoacuity measured with different separating methods
BACKGROUND: The majority of tests to evaluate stereopsis should separate two eyes first. Whether different binocular separating manner may affect the test result of stereopsis is the main purpose of this study. Red-green anaglyphs, polarized light technology, active shutter 3D system, and auto-stere...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
AME Publishing Company
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7210188/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32395512 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm.2020.03.73 |
_version_ | 1783531231023988736 |
---|---|
author | Zhao, Lingzhi Zhang, Yu Wu, Huang Xiao, Jun |
author_facet | Zhao, Lingzhi Zhang, Yu Wu, Huang Xiao, Jun |
author_sort | Zhao, Lingzhi |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The majority of tests to evaluate stereopsis should separate two eyes first. Whether different binocular separating manner may affect the test result of stereopsis is the main purpose of this study. Red-green anaglyphs, polarized light technology, active shutter 3D system, and auto-stereoscopic technique were chosen to evaluate distance stereoacuity. METHODS: Red-green anaglyphs test system was established with an ASUS laptop with the aid of TNO Stereotest glasses. Active shutter 3D system was set up with the same ASUS laptop with the aid of NVidia 3D Vision 2 Wireless Glasses Kit. The polarized 3D system adopted the AOC display. A Samsung naked-eye 3D laptop was used to set up an auto-stereoscopic system. Thirty subjects were recruited. Distance stereoacuity was measured with those computer systems. RESULTS: The auto-stereoscopic system was failed to measure distance stereopsis. A significant difference was found among red-green anaglyphs, polarized 3D system, and active shutter 3D system (Friedman Test, Chi-square =48.713, P<0.001). No significant difference was found between the polarized 3D system and an active shutter 3D system (Z=−1.134, P=0.257). The stereoacuity of the red-green glasses test was significantly worse than those of the other two test systems (versus shutter 3D test, Z=−4.553, P<0.001; versus polarized 3D test, Z=−4.618, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Different separating methods may affect the test result of distance stereopsis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7210188 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | AME Publishing Company |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72101882020-05-11 The difference of distance stereoacuity measured with different separating methods Zhao, Lingzhi Zhang, Yu Wu, Huang Xiao, Jun Ann Transl Med Original Article BACKGROUND: The majority of tests to evaluate stereopsis should separate two eyes first. Whether different binocular separating manner may affect the test result of stereopsis is the main purpose of this study. Red-green anaglyphs, polarized light technology, active shutter 3D system, and auto-stereoscopic technique were chosen to evaluate distance stereoacuity. METHODS: Red-green anaglyphs test system was established with an ASUS laptop with the aid of TNO Stereotest glasses. Active shutter 3D system was set up with the same ASUS laptop with the aid of NVidia 3D Vision 2 Wireless Glasses Kit. The polarized 3D system adopted the AOC display. A Samsung naked-eye 3D laptop was used to set up an auto-stereoscopic system. Thirty subjects were recruited. Distance stereoacuity was measured with those computer systems. RESULTS: The auto-stereoscopic system was failed to measure distance stereopsis. A significant difference was found among red-green anaglyphs, polarized 3D system, and active shutter 3D system (Friedman Test, Chi-square =48.713, P<0.001). No significant difference was found between the polarized 3D system and an active shutter 3D system (Z=−1.134, P=0.257). The stereoacuity of the red-green glasses test was significantly worse than those of the other two test systems (versus shutter 3D test, Z=−4.553, P<0.001; versus polarized 3D test, Z=−4.618, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Different separating methods may affect the test result of distance stereopsis. AME Publishing Company 2020-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7210188/ /pubmed/32395512 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm.2020.03.73 Text en 2020 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Zhao, Lingzhi Zhang, Yu Wu, Huang Xiao, Jun The difference of distance stereoacuity measured with different separating methods |
title | The difference of distance stereoacuity measured with different separating methods |
title_full | The difference of distance stereoacuity measured with different separating methods |
title_fullStr | The difference of distance stereoacuity measured with different separating methods |
title_full_unstemmed | The difference of distance stereoacuity measured with different separating methods |
title_short | The difference of distance stereoacuity measured with different separating methods |
title_sort | difference of distance stereoacuity measured with different separating methods |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7210188/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32395512 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm.2020.03.73 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhaolingzhi thedifferenceofdistancestereoacuitymeasuredwithdifferentseparatingmethods AT zhangyu thedifferenceofdistancestereoacuitymeasuredwithdifferentseparatingmethods AT wuhuang thedifferenceofdistancestereoacuitymeasuredwithdifferentseparatingmethods AT xiaojun thedifferenceofdistancestereoacuitymeasuredwithdifferentseparatingmethods AT zhaolingzhi differenceofdistancestereoacuitymeasuredwithdifferentseparatingmethods AT zhangyu differenceofdistancestereoacuitymeasuredwithdifferentseparatingmethods AT wuhuang differenceofdistancestereoacuitymeasuredwithdifferentseparatingmethods AT xiaojun differenceofdistancestereoacuitymeasuredwithdifferentseparatingmethods |