It has frequently happened in the history of medicine that to clearly formulate an idea so that it could be practically applied in farther study, and especially in order to enforce it on the attention of others, it has been given more prominence and more definiteness than it really deserved. This I believe has happened with the conception of latent hyperopia. Unquestionably latent hyperopia exists very frequently. But it probably does not exist so frequently, and to the extent that might be inferred from much that is said about it.
For several years I have made it a rule to ascertain as accurately as possible the state of refraction before using a mydriatic, especially in what seemed to be cases of hyperopia almost, or completely free from astigmatism. From my last three years' records of errors of refraction I have sought out all those in which a record was made
JACKSON E. MAINFST AND LATENT HYPEROPIA. Read in the Section of Ophthalmology, at the Forty third Annual Meeting of the American Medical Association, held in Detroit, Mich., June, 1892. JAMA. 1892;XIX(9):251–253. doi:10.1001/jama.1892.02420090013002e
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: