Journal of ophthalmic & vision research · 2017
Pattern Visual Evoked Potentials in Dyslexic Children.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Shandiz Javad Heravian, Heyrani Mohsen, Sobhani-Rad Davood, Salehinejad Zeinab, Shojaei Shirin, Khoshsima Mohamad Javad, Azimi Abbas, Yekta Abbas Ali, Yazdi Seyed Hosein Hoseini
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare pattern visual evoked potential (PVEP) components in dyslexic and normal children.
METHODS: This cross-sectional analytic study recruited 72 children, including 36 dyslexic and 36 normal participants aged 8-12 years. Visual examinations included measurement of distance visual acuity, refraction, and PVEP components of amplitudes and latencies with two different check sizes of 15 and 60 minutes (min) of arc at two contrast levels of 25% and 100%.
RESULTS: Our results demonstrated significant differences between dyslexic and normal children in terms of P100 latency and amplitude of PVEP at 25% contrast, with check sizes of 15 and 60 min of arc. However, there were no significant differences between the two groups regarding P100 latency and amplitude at 100% contrast with check sizes of both 15 and 60 min of arc.
CONCLUSION: Dyslexic participants showed reduced amplitude and prolonged latency in most PVEP components at low-contrast levels. These findings may support the magnocellular deficit hypothesis in dyslexic participants, even though the parvocellular pathway remains intact.
METHODS: This cross-sectional analytic study recruited 72 children, including 36 dyslexic and 36 normal participants aged 8-12 years. Visual examinations included measurement of distance visual acuity, refraction, and PVEP components of amplitudes and latencies with two different check sizes of 15 and 60 minutes (min) of arc at two contrast levels of 25% and 100%.
RESULTS: Our results demonstrated significant differences between dyslexic and normal children in terms of P100 latency and amplitude of PVEP at 25% contrast, with check sizes of 15 and 60 min of arc. However, there were no significant differences between the two groups regarding P100 latency and amplitude at 100% contrast with check sizes of both 15 and 60 min of arc.
CONCLUSION: Dyslexic participants showed reduced amplitude and prolonged latency in most PVEP components at low-contrast levels. These findings may support the magnocellular deficit hypothesis in dyslexic participants, even though the parvocellular pathway remains intact.