Skip to main content
Advertisement
  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Education
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Online Sections
    • Neurology Video Journal Club
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI)
    • Neurology: Clinical Practice Accelerator
    • Practice Buzz
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
  • Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Neurology Future Forecasting Series
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Topics A-Z
    • Translations
    • UDDA Revision Series
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Center

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Education
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Online Sections
    • Neurology Video Journal Club
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI)
    • Neurology: Clinical Practice Accelerator
    • Practice Buzz
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
  • Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Neurology Future Forecasting Series
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Topics A-Z
    • Translations
    • UDDA Revision Series
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Center
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Neurology Video Journal Club
  • Residents & Fellows

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Neurology
Home
The most widely read and highly cited peer-reviewed neurology journal
  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in
Site Logo
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Neurology Video Journal Club
  • Residents & Fellows

Author response to Drs. Wall & Schiefer

  • Krystel R. Huxlin, Professor, Flaum Eye Institute[email protected]
  • Matthew R. Cavanaugh
Submitted September 19, 2017

We thank Drs. Wall and Schiefer for the comment on our article. [1] While we agree that Humphrey visual fields (HVFs) are not perfect tests, they remain the clinical gold standard for measuring visual defects in hemianopia. There are several problems with Drs. Wall and Schiefer's statements. First, a shift in attention does not automatically cause a shift in fixation, as addressed in the extensive literature on covert visual attention, [2] and whose manipulation we are pursuing actively in NIH-funded work to enhance visual recovery in hemianopic fields. Second, while 24-2 HVFs have a resolution of 6 degrees, the 10-2 HVFs have a resolution of 2 degrees. As stated in our paper, [1] we combined and interpolated these two tests and the two eyes algorithmically, creating maps with a resolution of 0.1 degrees squared. Because these maps were formed from the averaging and interpolation of 4 separate fields, any small spontaneous fixation shift would have had to occur consistently 4 separate times for locations within the inner 10 degrees, and twice for locations greater than 10 degrees from fixation. Moreover, we excluded patients with abnormal false positive, false negative, and fixation loss rates and our 10-2 short-term fluctuations were approximately 2dB. [1] Ultimately, our inclusion of untrained patients provided the best evidence that recovery seen in trained patients was not due to test- retest variability or learning to perform better on the test. Only subjects with improved HVFs had improved psychophysical performance under strict fixation-controlled conditions enforced binocularly using an Eyelink1000 eye tracker with superior spatial and temporal resolution. [1] It was precisely to address the types of criticisms raised by Drs. Wall and Schiefer that we proposed a new approach to collecting and analyzing HVFs, while rigorously controlling for drifts in fixation, whether attention-induced or otherwise.

1. Cavanaugh MR, Huxlin KR. Visual discrimination training improves Humphrey perimetry in chronic cortically induced blindness. Neurology 2017;88:1856-1864.

2. Carrasco M. Visual attention: the past 25 years. Vision Res 2011;51:1484-1525.

For disclosures, please contact the editorial office at [email protected].

Navigate back to article

Neurology: 101 (22)

Articles

  • Ahead of Print
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Popular Articles
  • Translations

About

  • About the Journals
  • Ethics Policies
  • Editors & Editorial Board
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise

Submit

  • Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Information for Reviewers
  • AAN Guidelines
  • Permissions

Subscribers

  • Subscribe
  • Activate a Subscription
  • Sign up for eAlerts
  • RSS Feed
Site Logo
  • Visit neurology Template on Facebook
  • Follow neurology Template on Twitter
  • Visit Neurology on YouTube
  • Neurology
  • Neurology: Clinical Practice
  • Neurology: Education
  • Neurology: Genetics
  • Neurology: Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • AAN.com
  • Continuum
  • Brain & Life
  • Neurology Today

Wolters Kluwer Logo

Neurology | Print ISSN:0028-3878
Online ISSN:1526-632X

© 2023 American Academy of Neurology

  • Privacy Policy
  • Feedback
  • Advertise