Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 403

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Interaction between aberrations to improve or reduce visual performance

Applegate, Raymond A., Marsack, Jason D., Ramos, Roberto, Sarver, Edwin J.·2003·Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate how pairs of Zernike modes interact to increase or decrease visual acuity. SETTING: Visual Optics Institute, College of Optometry, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, USA. METHODS: Subjects read aberrated and unaberrated visual acuity charts 3 times. Each aberrated chart was produced by convolving an aberrated point-spread function with an unaberrated acuity chart. Point-spread functions were defined by 4 pairs of Zernike modes. For each pair, 9 combinations were used, ranging from all aberration being loaded into the first mode to all aberration being loaded into the second mode. The root mean square (RMS) wavefront error always totaled 0.25 microm (6.0 mm pupil), a level similar to the aberration induced by traditional flying small-spot laser refractive surgeries. RESULTS: For all conditions (except the unaberrated charts), visual acuity decreased. Acuity varied significantly depending on which modes were mixed and the relative contribution of each mode. Modes 2 radial orders apart and having the same sign and angular frequency tended to combine to increase visual acuity. Modes within the same radial order tended to combine to decrease acuity. CONCLUSIONS: For low levels of aberration, the RMS wavefront error is not a good predictor of visual acuity. Clinically, it is important to define how aberrations interact to optimize visual performance. New metrics of optical/neural performance that correlate better with clinical measures of visual performance need to be adopted or developed, as well as new clinically viable measures of visual performance that are sensitive to subtle changes in optical performance.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0886-3350(03)00334-1

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

See all 403

Metadata

Authors
Applegate, R. A., Marsack, J. D., Ramos, R., & Sarver, E. J.
Venue
Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery
Published
2003-08
Volume
29
Issue
8
Pages
1487-1495
ISSN
  • 0146-2776 (ISSN-L)
  • 0886-3350
OpenAlex
W2142624198
Cited by
403
References
14
FWCI
12.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Interaction between aberrations to improve or reduce visual performance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0886-3350(03)00334-1
The paper
Applegate, R. A., Marsack, J. D., Ramos, R., & Sarver, E. J. (2003). Interaction between aberrations to improve or reduce visual performance. Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0886-3350(03)00334-1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.