Results of ocular dominance testing depend on assessment method

Melissa L. Rice, David A. Leske, Christina E. Smestad, Jonathan M. Holmes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

49 Scopus citations


Purpose: We developed a near ocular dominance test modeled after the distance hole-in-the-card test and assessed both test-retest reliability of four tests of ocular dominance and agreement between tests. Methods: Forty-six subjects aged 18 to 78 years with visual acuity 20/40 or better in each eye were enrolled from a primary care practice. All subjects had normal eye examinations, with the exception of refractive error, and were examined in their habitual correction. Subjects were tested twice each with the distance hole-in-the-card test, new near hole-in-the-card test, near convergence test, and the Pediatric Eye Disease Investigator Group fixation preference test. Results: There was excellent test-retest reliability for each ocular dominance test. Nevertheless, there was only moderate to slight agreement between each possible pairing of tests. Conclusions: Results of ocular dominance tests vary depending on both the testing distance and the specific activity performed as part of the testing procedure.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)365-369
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of AAPOS
Issue number4
StatePublished - Aug 2008

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Ophthalmology


Dive into the research topics of 'Results of ocular dominance testing depend on assessment method'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this