13 resultados para correction methods
em Aston University Research Archive
Resumo:
Electrocardiography (ECG) has been recently proposed as biometric trait for identification purposes. Intra-individual variations of ECG might affect identification performance. These variations are mainly due to Heart Rate Variability (HRV). In particular, HRV causes changes in the QT intervals along the ECG waveforms. This work is aimed at analysing the influence of seven QT interval correction methods (based on population models) on the performance of ECG-fiducial-based identification systems. In addition, we have also considered the influence of training set size, classifier, classifier ensemble as well as the number of consecutive heartbeats in a majority voting scheme. The ECG signals used in this study were collected from thirty-nine subjects within the Physionet open access database. Public domain software was used for fiducial points detection. Results suggested that QT correction is indeed required to improve the performance. However, there is no clear choice among the seven explored approaches for QT correction (identification rate between 0.97 and 0.99). MultiLayer Perceptron and Support Vector Machine seemed to have better generalization capabilities, in terms of classification performance, with respect to Decision Tree-based classifiers. No such strong influence of the training-set size and the number of consecutive heartbeats has been observed on the majority voting scheme.
Resumo:
Substantial altimetry datasets collected by different satellites have only become available during the past five years, but the future will bring a variety of new altimetry missions, both parallel and consecutive in time. The characteristics of each produced dataset vary with the different orbital heights and inclinations of the spacecraft, as well as with the technical properties of the radar instrument. An integral analysis of datasets with different properties offers advantages both in terms of data quantity and data quality. This thesis is concerned with the development of the means for such integral analysis, in particular for dynamic solutions in which precise orbits for the satellites are computed simultaneously. The first half of the thesis discusses the theory and numerical implementation of dynamic multi-satellite altimetry analysis. The most important aspect of this analysis is the application of dual satellite altimetry crossover points as a bi-directional tracking data type in simultaneous orbit solutions. The central problem is that the spatial and temporal distributions of the crossovers are in conflict with the time-organised nature of traditional solution methods. Their application to the adjustment of the orbits of both satellites involved in a dual crossover therefore requires several fundamental changes of the classical least-squares prediction/correction methods. The second part of the thesis applies the developed numerical techniques to the problems of precise orbit computation and gravity field adjustment, using the altimetry datasets of ERS-1 and TOPEX/Poseidon. Although the two datasets can be considered less compatible that those of planned future satellite missions, the obtained results adequately illustrate the merits of a simultaneous solution technique. In particular, the geographically correlated orbit error is partially observable from a dataset consisting of crossover differences between two sufficiently different altimetry datasets, while being unobservable from the analysis of altimetry data of both satellites individually. This error signal, which has a substantial gravity-induced component, can be employed advantageously in simultaneous solutions for the two satellites in which also the harmonic coefficients of the gravity field model are estimated.
Resumo:
Purpose: To assess visual performance and ocular aberrations in keratoconic patients using toric soft contact lenses (SCL), rigid-gas-permeable (RGP) contact lenses and spectacle lens correction. Methods: Twenty-two keratoconus patients (16 RGP lens wearers and six spectacle wearers) were fitted with toric SCL. Ocular aberrations were measured with and without the patient's habitual RGP lenses and with the SCL in place. In the spectacle wearers, aberrations were measured with and without the SCL. Visual performance (high- and low-contrast visual acuity) was evaluated with the patient's habitual correction and with the SCL. Results: In the RGP lens wearers both the habitual lenses and the toric SCL significantly reduced coma, trefoil, 3rd-order, 4th-order cylinder and higher-order root-mean-square (RMS) aberrations (p≤0.015). In the spectacle wearers the toric SCL significantly reduced coma, 3rd-order and higher-order RMS aberrations (p≤0.01). The patients' habitual RGP lenses gave better low-contrast acuity (p≤0.006) compared to the toric SCL; however, no significant difference was found between lens types for high-contrast acuity (p=0.10). In the spectacle wearers no significant differences in visual performance measurements were found between the patients' spectacles and the toric SCL (p≥0.06). Conclusion: The results show that RGP lenses provided superior visual performances and greater reduction of 3rd-order aberrations compared to toric SCL in this group of keratoconic patients. In the spectacle-wearing group, visual performance with the toric SCL was found to be comparable to that measured with spectacles. Nevertheless, with the exception of spherical aberration, the toric SCL were successful in significantly reducing uncorrected higher-order aberrations. Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics © 2012 The College of Optometrists.
Resumo:
The correction of presbyopia and restoration of true accommodative function to the ageing eye is the focus of much ongoing research and clinical work. A range of accommodating intraocular lenses (AIOLs) implanted during cataract surgery has been developed and they are designed to change either their position or shape in response to ciliary muscle contraction to generate an increase in dioptric power. Two main design concepts exist. First, axial shift concepts rely on anterior axial movement of one or two optics creating accommodative ability. Second, curvature change designs are designed to provide significant amplitudes of accommodation with little physical displacement. Single-optic devices have been used most widely, although the true accommodative ability provided by forward shift of the optic appears limited and recent findings indicate that alternative factors such as flexing of the optic to alter ocular aberrations may be responsible for the enhanced near vision reported in published studies. Techniques for analysing the performance of AIOLs have not been standardised and clinical studies have reported findings using a wide range of both subjective and objective methods, making it difficult to gauge the success of these implants. There is a need for longitudinal studies using objective methods to assess long-term performance of AIOLs and to determine if true accommodation is restored by the designs available. While dual-optic and curvature change IOLs are designed to provide greater amplitudes of accommodation than is possible with single-optic devices, several of these implants are in the early stages of development and require significant further work before human use is possible. A number of challenges remain and must be addressed before the ultimate goal of restoring youthful levels of accommodation to the presbyopic eye can be achieved.
Resumo:
Purpose To develop a standardized questionnaire of near visual function and satisfaction to complement visual function evaluations of presbyopic corrections. Setting Eye Clinic, School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Midland Eye Institute and Solihull Hospital, Birmingham, United Kingdom. Design Questionnaire development. Methods A preliminary 26-item questionnaire of previously used near visual function items was completed by patients with monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs), multifocal IOLs, accommodating IOLs, multifocal contact lenses, or varifocal spectacles. Rasch analysis was used for item reduction, after which internal and test–retest reliabilities were determined. Construct validity was determined by correlating the resulting Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ) scores with near visual acuity and critical print size (CPS), which was measured using the Minnesota Low Vision Reading Test chart. Discrimination ability was assessed through receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Results One hundred fifty patients completed the questionnaire. Item reduction resulted in a 10-item NAVQ with excellent separation (2.92), internal consistency (Cronbach a = 0.95), and test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.72). Correlations of questionnaire scores with near visual acuity (r = 0.32) and CPS (r = 0.27) provided evidence of validity, and discrimination ability was excellent (area under ROC curve = 0.91). Conclusion Results show the NAVQ is a reliable, valid instrument that can be incorporated into the evaluation of presbyopic corrections.
Resumo:
Presbyopia is an age-related eye condition where one of the signs is the reduction in the amplitude of accommodation, resulting in the loss of ability to change the eye's focus from far to near. It is the most common age-related ailments affecting everyone around their mid-40s. Methods for the correction of presbyopia include contact lens and spectacle options but the surgical correction of presbyopia still remains a significant challenge for refractive surgeons. Surgical strategies for dealing with presbyopia may be extraocular (corneal or scleral) or intraocular (removal and replacement of the crystalline lens or some type of treatment on the crystalline lens itself). There are however a number of limitations and considerations that have limited the widespread acceptance of surgical correction of presbyopia. Each surgical strategy presents its own unique set of advantages and disadvantages. For example, lens removal and replacement with an intraocular lens may not be preferable in a young patient with presbyopia without a refractive error. Similarly treatment on the crystalline lens may not be a suitable choice for a patient with early signs of cataract. This article is a review of the options available and those that are in development stages and are likely to be available in the near future for the surgical correction of presbyopia.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To provide a consistent standard for the evaluation of different types of presbyopic correction. SETTING: Eye Clinic, School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom. METHODS: Presbyopic corrections examined were accommodating intraocular lenses (IOLs), simultaneous multifocal and monovision contact lenses, and varifocal spectacles. Binocular near visual acuity measured with different optotypes (uppercase letters, lowercase letters, and words) and reading metrics assessed with the Minnesota Near Reading chart (reading acuity, critical print size [CPS], CPS reading speed) were intercorrelated (Pearson product moment correlations) and assessed for concordance (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC]) and agreement (Bland-Altman analysis) for indication of clinical usefulness. RESULTS: Nineteen accommodating IOL cases, 40 simultaneous contact lens cases, and 38 varifocal spectacle cases were evaluated. Other than CPS reading speed, all near visual acuity and reading metrics correlated well with each other (r>0.70, P<.001). Near visual acuity measured with uppercase letters was highly concordant (ICC, 0.78) and in close agreement with lowercase letters (+/- 0.17 logMAR). Near word acuity agreed well with reading acuity (+/- 0.16 logMAR), which in turn agreed well with near visual acuity measured with uppercase letters 0.16 logMAR). Concordance (ICC, 0.18 to 0.46) and agreement (+/- 0.24 to 0.30 logMAR) of CPS with the other near metrics was moderate. CONCLUSION: Measurement of near visual ability in presbyopia should be standardized to include assessment of near visual acuity with logMAR uppercase-letter optotypes, smallest logMAR print size that maintains maximum reading speed (CPS), and reading speed. J Cataract Refract Surg 2009; 35:1401-1409 (C) 2009 ASCRS and ESCRS
Resumo:
High levels of corneal astigmatism are prevalent in a significant proportion of the population. During cataract surgery pre-existing astigmatism can be corrected using single or paired incisions on the steep axis of the cornea, using relaxing incisions or with the use of a toric intraocular lens. This review provides an overview of the conventional methods of astigmatic correction during cataract surgery and in particular, discusses the various types of toric lenses presently available and the techniques used in determining the correct axis for the placement of such lenses. Furthermore, the potential causes of rotation in toric lenses are identified, along with techniques for assessing and quantifying the amount of rotation and subsequent management options for addressing post-operative rotation.
Resumo:
1. Fitting a linear regression to data provides much more information about the relationship between two variables than a simple correlation test. A goodness of fit test of the line should always be carried out. Hence, r squared estimates the strength of the relationship between Y and X, ANOVA whether a statistically significant line is present, and the ‘t’ test whether the slope of the line is significantly different from zero. 2. Always check whether the data collected fit the assumptions for regression analysis and, if not, whether a transformation of the Y and/or X variables is necessary. 3. If the regression line is to be used for prediction, it is important to determine whether the prediction involves an individual y value or a mean. Care should be taken if predictions are made close to the extremities of the data and are subject to considerable error if x falls beyond the range of the data. Multiple predictions require correction of the P values. 3. If several individual regression lines have been calculated from a number of similar sets of data, consider whether they should be combined to form a single regression line. 4. If the data exhibit a degree of curvature, then fitting a higher-order polynomial curve may provide a better fit than a straight line. In this case, a test of whether the data depart significantly from a linear regression should be carried out.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To examine which baseline measurements constitute predictive factors for axial length growth over 2 years in children wearing orthokeratology contact lenses (OK) and single-vision spectacles (SV). METHODS: Sixty-one children were prospectively assigned to wear either OK (n = 31) or SV (n = 30) for 2 years. The primary outcome measure (dependent variable) was axial length change at 2 years relative to baseline. Other measurements (independent variables) were age, age of myopia onset, gender, myopia progression 2 years before baseline and baseline myopia, anterior chamber depth, corneal power and shape (p value), and iris and pupil diameters as well as parental refraction. The contribution of all independent variables to the 2-year change in axial length was assessed using univariate and multivariate regression analyses. RESULTS: After univariate analyses, smaller increases in axial length were found in the OK group compared to the SV group in children who were older, had earlier onset of myopia, were female, had lower rate of myopia progression before baseline, had less myopia at baseline, had longer anterior chamber depth, had greater corneal power, had more prolate corneal shape, had larger iris diameter, had larger pupil sizes, and had lower levels of parental myopia (all p < 0.05). In multivariate analyses, older age and greater corneal power were associated with smaller increases in axial length in the OK group (both p < 0.05), whereas in SV wearers, smaller iris diameter was associated with smaller increases in axial length (p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Orthokeratology is a successful treatment option in controlling axial elongation compared to SV in children of older age, had earlier onset of myopia, were female, had lower rate of myopia progression before baseline, had lower myopia at baseline, had longer anterior chamber depth, had greater corneal power, had more prolate corneal shape, had larger iris and pupil diameters, and had lower levels of parental myopia. © American Academy of Optometry.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: The Bonferroni correction adjusts probability (p) values because of the increased risk of a type I error when making multiple statistical tests. The routine use of this test has been criticised as deleterious to sound statistical judgment, testing the wrong hypothesis, and reducing the chance of a type I error but at the expense of a type II error; yet it remains popular in ophthalmic research. The purpose of this article was to survey the use of the Bonferroni correction in research articles published in three optometric journals, viz. Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics, Optometry & Vision Science, and Clinical & Experimental Optometry, and to provide advice to authors contemplating multiple testing. RECENT FINDINGS: Some authors ignored the problem of multiple testing while others used the method uncritically with no rationale or discussion. A variety of methods of correcting p values were employed, the Bonferroni method being the single most popular. Bonferroni was used in a variety of circumstances, most commonly to correct the experiment-wise error rate when using multiple 't' tests or as a post-hoc procedure to correct the family-wise error rate following analysis of variance (anova). Some studies quoted adjusted p values incorrectly or gave an erroneous rationale. SUMMARY: Whether or not to use the Bonferroni correction depends on the circumstances of the study. It should not be used routinely and should be considered if: (1) a single test of the 'universal null hypothesis' (Ho ) that all tests are not significant is required, (2) it is imperative to avoid a type I error, and (3) a large number of tests are carried out without preplanned hypotheses.
Resumo:
Presbyopia is a consequence of ageing and is therefore increasing inprevalence due to an increase in the ageing population. Of the many methods available to manage presbyopia, the use of contact lenses is indeed a tried and tested reversible option for those wishing to be spectacle free. Contact lens options to correct presbyopia include multifocal contact lenses and monovision.Several options have been available for many years with available guides to help choose multifocal contact lenses. However there is no comprehensive way to help the practitioner selecting the best option for an individual. An examination of the simplest way of predicting the most suitable multifocal lens for a patient will only enhance and add to the current evidence available. The purpose of the study was to determine the current use of presbyopic correction modalities in an optometric practice population in the UK and to evaluate and compare the optical performance of four silicone hydrogel soft multifocal contact lenses and to compare multifocal performance with contact lens monovision. The presbyopic practice cohort principal forms of refractive correction were distance spectacles (with near and intermediate vision providedby a variety of other forms of correction), varifocal spectacles and unaided distance with reading spectacles, with few patients wearing contact lenses as their primary correction modality. The results of the multifocal contact lens randomised controlled trial showed that there were only minor differences in corneal physiology between the lens options. Visual acuity differences were observed for distance targets, but only for low contrast letters and under mesopic lighting conditions. At closer distances between 20cm and 67cm, the defocus curves demonstrated that there were significant differences in acuity between lens designs (p < 0.001) and there was an interaction between the lens design and the level of defocus (p < 0.001). None of the lenses showed a clear near addition, perhaps due to their more aspheric rather than zoned design. As expected, stereoacuity was reduced with monovision compared with the multifocal contact lens designs, although there were some differences between the multifocal lens designs (p < 0.05). Reading speed did not differ between lens designs (F = 1.082, p = 0.368), whereas there was a significant difference in critical print size (F = 7.543, p < 0.001). Glare was quantified with a novel halometer and halo size was found to significantly differ between lenses(F = 4.101, p = 0.004). The rating of iPhone image clarity was significantly different between presbyopic corrections (p = 0.002) as was the Near Acuity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ) rating of near performance (F = 3.730, p = 0.007).The pupil size did not alter with contact lens design (F = 1.614, p = 0.175), but was larger in the dominant eye (F = 5.489, p = 0.025). Pupil decentration relative to the optical axis did not alter with contact lens design (F = 0.777, p =0.542), but was also greater in the dominant eye (F = 9.917, p = 0.003). It was interesting to note that there was no difference in spherical aberrations induced between the contact lens designs (p > 0.05), with eye dominance (p > 0.05) oroptical component (ocular, corneal or internal: p > 0.05). In terms of subjective patient lens preference, 10 patients preferred monovision,12 Biofinity multifocal lens, 7 Purevision 2 for Presbyopia, 4 AirOptix multifocal and 2 Oasys multifocal contact lenses. However, there were no differences in demographic factors relating to lifestyle or personality, or physiological characteristics such as pupil size or ocular aberrations as measured at baseline,which would allow a practitioner to identify which lens modality the patient would prefer. In terms of the performance of patients with their preferred lens, it emerged that Biofinity multifocal lens preferring patients had a better high contrast acuity under photopic conditions, maintained their reading speed at smaller print sizes and subjectively rated iPhone clarity as better with this lens compared with the other lens designs trialled. Patients who preferred monovision had a lower acuity across a range of distances and a larger area of glare than those patients preferring other lens designs that was unexplained by the clinical metrics measured. However, it seemed that a complex interaction of aberrations may drive lens preference. New clinical tests or more diverse lens designs which may allow practitioners to prescribe patients the presbyopic contact lens option that will work best for them first time remains a hope for the future.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To determine the utility of a range of clinical and non-clinical indicators to aid the initial selection of the optimum presbyopic contact lens. In addition, to assess whether lens preference was influenced by the visual performance compared to the other designs trialled (intra-subject) or compared to participants who preferred other designs (inter-subject). METHODS: A double-masked randomised crossover trial of Air Optix Aqua multifocal, PureVision 2 for Presbyopia, Acuvue OASYS for Presbyopia, Biofinity multifocal and monovision was conducted on 35 presbyopes (54.3±6.2years). Participant lifestyle, personality, pupil characteristics and aberrometry were assessed prior to lens fitting. After 4 weeks of wear, high and low contrast visual acuity (VA) under photopic and mesopic conditions, reading speed, Near Activity Visual Questionnaire (NAVQ) rating, subjective quality-of-vision scoring, defocus curves, stereopsis, halometry, aberrometry and ocular physiology were quantified. RESULTS: After trialling all the lenses, preference was mixed (n=12 Biofinity, n=10 monovision, n=7 Purevision, n=4 Air Optix Aqua, n=2 Oasys). Lens preference was not dependent on personality (F=1.182, p=0.323) or the hours spent working at near (p=0.535) or intermediate (p=0.759) distances. No intersubject or strong intrasubject relationships emerged between lens preference and reading speed, NAVQ rating, halo size, aberrometry or ocular physiology (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Participant lifestyle and personality, ocular optics, contact lens visual performance and ocular physiology provided poor indicators of the preferred lens type after 4 weeks of wear. This is confounded by the wide range of task visual demands of presbyopes and the limited optical differences between current multifocal contact lens designs.