Comparison of Worth Four Dots (W4D) and Bagolini Striated Lenses in adult suppression detection

Suppression is an adaptive response in which visual information from one eye is inhibited to prevent visual conflict. This phenomenon is commonly observed in individuals with strabismus, anisometropia, or amblyopia. Clinically detecting suppression is essential for assessing binocular vision and conducting visual training. The Worth Four Dots (W4D) and Bagolini Striated Lenses (BAG) are widely used tools. However, empirical comparisons of their screening performance in large-scale clinical settings remain limited. This single-center, prospective, cross-sectional study recruited participants aged ≥ 18 at the Yuan Dong Optometry Clinic in Chiayi, Taiwan. All participants underwent distance suppression measurements using the W4D and BAG following subjective refraction. The W4D was consistently conducted prior to the BAG. The agreement between the two tests was analyzed using cross-tabulation, Cohen’s kappa coefficient, and McNemar’s test. A total of 2280 participants were included in this study. The W4D identified suppression in 35 participants, while the BAG identified 26 participants. Among these, 22 participants were positive on both tests; 13 were positive only on the W4D, and 4 were positive only on the BAG. Cohen’s kappa coefficient was 0.72, indicating a good level of agreement between the two tests. However, McNemar’s test revealed a significant difference between the two tests (p = 0.049), with the W4D detecting more positive participants. This study demonstrated a significant difference in suppression detection between the W4D and BAG. In the absence of a gold standard, the W4D is recommended as a first-line screening tool due to its higher detection rate. Further confirmatory testing should be conducted when suppression is indicated.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Ophthalmology
Published
2025-10-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12886-025-04416-x
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Ocular and Laser Science Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.71
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of Worth Four Dots (W4D) and Bagolini Striated Lenses in adult suppression detection

Christina Lin, Li‐Te Yin, Kun‐Shiang Chen, Guan-Cheng Lin
1 citations
BMC Ophthalmology
Ocular and Laser Science Research
1.71
article

Comparison of Worth Four Dots (W4D) and Bagolini Striated Lenses in adult suppression detection

Christina Lin, Li‐Te Yin, Kun‐Shiang Chen, Guan-Cheng Lin
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Suppression is an adaptive response in which visual information from one eye is inhibited to prevent visual conflict. This phenomenon is commonly observed in individuals with strabismus, anisometropia, or amblyopia. Clinically detecting suppression is essential for assessing binocular vision and conducting visual training. The Worth Four Dots (W4D) and Bagolini Striated Lenses (BAG) are widely used tools. However, empirical comparisons of their screening performance in large-scale clinical settings remain limited. This single-center, prospective, cross-sectional study recruited participants aged ≥ 18 at the Yuan Dong Optometry Clinic in Chiayi, Taiwan. All participants underwent distance suppression measurements using the W4D and BAG following subjective refraction. The W4D was consistently conducted prior to the BAG. The agreement between the two tests was analyzed using cross-tabulation, Cohen’s kappa coefficient, and McNemar’s test. A total of 2280 participants were included in this study. The W4D identified suppression in 35 participants, while the BAG identified 26 participants. Among these, 22 participants were positive on both tests; 13 were positive only on the W4D, and 4 were positive only on the BAG. Cohen’s kappa coefficient was 0.72, indicating a good level of agreement between the two tests. However, McNemar’s test revealed a significant difference between the two tests (p = 0.049), with the W4D detecting more positive participants. This study demonstrated a significant difference in suppression detection between the W4D and BAG. In the absence of a gold standard, the W4D is recommended as a first-line screening tool due to its higher detection rate. Further confirmatory testing should be conducted when suppression is indicated.

BMC OphthalmologyVol. 25(1)
Chung Hwa University of Medical Technology (TW)
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Ocular and Laser Science Research
1.71
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Comparison of Worth Four Dots (W4D) and Bagolini Striated Lenses in adult suppression detection — Christina Lin, Li‐Te Yin, et al. · BMC Ophthalmology (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS