↓ Skip to main content

Simulation of thalamic prosthetic vision: reading accuracy, speed, and acuity in sighted humans

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Simulation of thalamic prosthetic vision: reading accuracy, speed, and acuity in sighted humans
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00816
Pubmed ID
Authors

Milena Vurro, Anne Marie Crowell, John S. Pezaris

Abstract

The psychophysics of reading with artificial sight has received increasing attention as visual prostheses are becoming a real possibility to restore useful function to the blind through the coarse, pseudo-pixelized vision they generate. Studies to date have focused on simulating retinal and cortical prostheses; here we extend that work to report on thalamic designs. This study examined the reading performance of normally sighted human subjects using a simulation of three thalamic visual prostheses that varied in phosphene count, to help understand the level of functional ability afforded by thalamic designs in a task of daily living. Reading accuracy, reading speed, and reading acuity of 20 subjects were measured as a function of letter size, using a task based on the MNREAD chart. Results showed that fluid reading was feasible with appropriate combinations of letter size and phosphene count, and performance degraded smoothly as font size was decreased, with an approximate doubling of phosphene count resulting in an increase of 0.2 logMAR in acuity. Results here were consistent with previous results from our laboratory. Results were also consistent with those from the literature, despite using naive subjects who were not trained on the simulator, in contrast to other reports.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 39 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 22%
Student > Master 7 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Researcher 5 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 8 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 10 24%
Engineering 6 15%
Computer Science 4 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 8 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 August 2019.
All research outputs
#1,986,481
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#988
of 7,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,953
of 262,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#40
of 231 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,139 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,198 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 231 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.