[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.146.184.210. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
December 1962

TUBULAR VS. CONE FIELDS

Author Affiliations

Department of Ophthalmology Indiana University Medical Center 1100 West Michigan St. Indianapolis 7

Arch Ophthalmol. 1962;68(6):886. doi:10.1001/archopht.1962.00960030890029

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

To the Editor:  —A recent article in the Archives (McKay, R. A., and Spivey, B. E.: Generalized Choroidal Angiosclerosis, Arch Ophthal. 67:727-735, 1962) points out a common error in terminology regarding visual fields to which I feel attention should be called.Fields which are severely contracted are often mistakenly referred to as tubular when in fact they are the shape of a slender cone. As pointed out by Harrington in his book on the visual fields, "In all cases of true tubular field in hysteria there is one common factor of utmost diagnostic importance: The visual field is cylindrical instead of cone shaped. This can only result from disturbances of psychogenic origin and cannot be an organic visual field defect."The Correspondence Section welcomes inquiries and comments of a general or specific nature. The Editors may try to answer some of the questions, but more valuable will be the answers

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×