Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
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 In Reply. —Dr Mims and Mr Wood present their view that the Prism Adaptation Trial (PAT) "was flawed because the... [PAT surgical table] called for amounts of surgery... that were simply too small" for the control group, and suggested that surgical amounts should be determined by the use of a dose-response curve described in their 1986 article. In response, we note the following: There were more overcorrections in the PAT control groups, which received smaller amounts of surgery on average, than in the prism-adapted surgical group. We concluded that prism adaptation appears to identify a subgroup of patients in whom it is safe to perform larger amounts of surgery without increasing the rate of overcorrection. If larger amounts of surgery had been performed routinely in the control groups, it is likely that the number of overcorrections would have increased. It is not clear, as claimed by Mims and Wood in
Archives of Ophthalmology – American Medical Association
Published: Apr 1, 1991
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.