This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
To the Editor:
—I have read with great interest Dr. Lancaster's comments on my paper entitled "A Comparison of Ocular Imagery," published in the June 1943 issue of the Archives, and I wish to thank him for his statements and comments. However, he seems to be of the opinion that no instrument save the eikonometer is useful in measuring ocular imagery. As I stated in my original paper, I feel that in their present stage of development neither the eikonometer nor the comparator is adequate for measuring accurately a state of aniseikonia.The "just noticeable difference" which Dr. Lancaster mentions is well recognized by all ophthalmologists and has been the subject of considerable investigation by various students of the comparator, as well as the eikonometer.It is unfortunate that the national emergency has interfered with investigation of these two instruments. I am unable at present to accept the eikonometer as
Field HB. COMPARISON OF OCULAR IMAGERY. Arch Ophthalmol. 1944;31(2):170. doi:10.1001/archopht.1944.00890020056010
Artificial Intelligence Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.