The Graded Incomplete Letters Test (GILT): a rapid test to detect cortical visual loss, with UK Biobank implementation
Behavior Research Methods, ISSN: 1554-3528, Vol: 56, Issue: 7, Page: 7748-7760
2024
- 1Citations
- 10Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Most Recent News
The Graded Incomplete Letters Test (GILT): a rapid test to detect cortical visual loss, with UK Biobank implementation.
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Jun 18; Authors: Yong K, Petzold A, Foster P, Young A, Bell S, Bai Y, Leff AP, Crutch S, Greenwood JA PubMed: 38890263 Submit Comment
Article Description
Impairments of object recognition are core features of neurodegenerative syndromes, in particular posterior cortical atrophy (PCA; the ‘visual-variant Alzheimer’s disease’). These impairments arise from damage to higher-level cortical visual regions and are often missed or misattributed to common ophthalmological conditions. Consequently, diagnosis can be delayed for years with considerable implications for patients. We report a new test for the rapid measurement of cortical visual loss – the Graded Incomplete Letters Test (GILT). The GILT is an optimised psychophysical variation of a test used to diagnose cortical visual impairment, which measures thresholds for recognising letters under levels of increasing visual degradation (decreasing "completeness") in a similar fashion to ophthalmic tests. The GILT was administered to UK Biobank participants (total n=2,359) and participants with neurodegenerative conditions characterised by initial cortical visual (PCA, n=18) or memory loss (typical Alzheimer’s disease, n=9). UK Biobank participants, including both typical adults and those with ophthalmological conditions, were able to recognise letters under low levels of completeness. In contrast, participants with PCA consistently made errors with only modest decreases in completeness. GILT sensitivity to PCA was 83.3% for participants reaching the 80% accuracy cut-off, increasing to 88.9% using alternative cut-offs (60% or 100% accuracy). Specificity values were consistently over 94% when compared to UK Biobank participants without or with documented visual conditions, regardless of accuracy cut-off. These first-release UK Biobank and clinical verification data suggest the GILT has utility in both rapidly detecting visual perceptual losses following posterior cortical damage and differentiating perceptual losses from common eye-related conditions.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85196269700&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-024-02448-7; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38890263; https://link.springer.com/10.3758/s13428-024-02448-7; https://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-024-02448-7; https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13428-024-02448-7
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know