The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Improving the Reliability of the Pelli-Robson Contrast Sensitivity Test
Abstract
The clinical applications of contrast sensitivity testing have been discussed in numerous reports, and a number of printed contrast sensitivity tests are commercially available. Some of these tests use letters as targets rather than sine or square wave gratings (Regan and Neima, 1983; Pelli et al., 1988). Letter contrast sensitivity charts have the advantage of being quick to administer and the nature of the task is familiar to both the patient and the practitioner. The letter identification task has the advantage of being a multiple-alternative forced-choice procedure that limits patient criterion effects (Vaegen and Halliday, 1983). The Pelli-Robson chart (Pelli et al., 1988) consists of sixteen triplets of letters, with each letter subtending 3 degrees at the recommended viewing distance of 1 meter. Within each triplet the letters have the same contrast and the contrast in each successive triplet decreases by a factor of 0.15 log units (√2). Pelli et al. recommend scoring contrast sensitivity as the lowest contrast level at which at least two of the triplet are identified correctly.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
The reliability of the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity chart
Elliott, D. (1990) · Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics · doi:10.1016/0275-5408(90)90124-h · Cited by 272
Low-Contrast Letter Charts as a Test of Visual Function
Regan, D., & Neima, D. (1983) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/s0161-6420(83)34407-9 · Cited by 210
A forced-choice test improves clinical contrast sensitivity testing.
Vaegan, & Halliday, B. L. (1982) · British Journal of Ophthalmology · doi:10.1136/bjo.66.8.477 · Cited by 69
Cited by
McAlinden, C., Khadka, J., & Pesudovs, K. (2011) · Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics · doi:10.1111/j.1475-1313.2011.00851.x · Cited by 436
Risk of Falls and Motor Vehicle Collisions in Glaucoma
Haymes, S. A., LeBlanc, R. P., Nicolela, M. T., Chiasson, L. A., & Chauhan, B. C. (2007) · Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science · doi:10.1167/iovs.06-0886 · Cited by 311
Normal values for the Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity test
Mäntyjärvi, M., & Laitinen, T. (2001) · Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery · doi:10.1016/s0886-3350(00)00562-9 · Cited by 259
Delays in rod-mediated dark adaptation in early age-related maculopathy
Owsley, C., Jackson, G. R., White, M., Feist, R., & Edwards, D. (2001) · Ophthalmology · doi:10.1016/s0161-6420(01)00580-2 · Cited by 258
The Impact of Age-Related Macular Degeneration on Health Status Utility Values
Espallargues, M., Czoski-Murray, C. J., Bansback, N. J., Carlton, J., Lewis, G. M., Hughes, L. A., Brand, C. S., & Brazier, J. E. (2005) · Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science · doi:10.1167/iovs.05-0072 · Cited by 150
Metadata
- Authors
- Bullimore, M. A., Elliot, D. B., & Bailey, I. L.
- Venue
- Noninvasive Assessment of the Visual System
- Publisher
- Optica Publishing Group
- Published
- 1991
- Pages
- MD12
- OpenAlex
- W1598965288
- Cited by
- 253
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 6.58
- Type
- conference paper
- 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: Improving the Reliability of the Pelli-Robson Contrast Sensitivity Test. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1364/navs.1991.md12
- The paper
- Bullimore, M. A., Elliot, D. B., & Bailey, I. L. (1991). Improving the Reliability of the Pelli-Robson Contrast Sensitivity Test. Noninvasive Assessment of the Visual System. https://doi.org/10.1364/navs.1991.md12
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.
