RESUMO
Objective: The main purpose of this study was to investigate short-term effects of nicotine gum on facial detection. Methods: Fourteen participants (mean age = 26.8 years, SD = 2.5 years; eight males) were enrolled in this pilot randomized controlled trial of nicotine gum administration (placebo, 2-mg and 4-mg doses). The participants were instructed to detect the location of a face when it was presented in a face/nonface pair on the screen. A repeated multivariate analysis of variance was conducted to analyze the results for reaction time and discrimination index. Demographics were used to explore significant association on facial detection. Bayesian analyses were also carried out considering maximum robustness to avoid bias. Results: The results indicated that the 2-mg dose resulted in faster reaction time and better discrimination than the 4-mg dose (p < 0.001). The 4-mg dose resulted in slower reaction time and lower discrimination index compared to both placebo (p < 0.01) and 2-mg doses (p < 0.001). Demographic data were not related to the outcomes. Conclusions: The results indicate that nicotine improved facial detection, but only at low doses (i.e., 2-mg), following a U-shaped curve. We trust future studies will continue to advance this research field, and if further work supports these preliminary findings, nicotine can act as therapeutic target in populations such as those with low vision.
Assuntos
Reconhecimento Facial , Gengiva , Voluntários Saudáveis/estatística & dados numéricos , Nicotina/administração & dosagem , não Fumantes , Tempo de Reação , Adulto , Cotinina/sangue , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Projetos PilotoRESUMO
PURPOSE: The goals of the study were to further assess contrast sensitivity to (1) investigate the existence of monocular vs. binocular differences; (2) observe possible differences between sample sizes; (3) investigate the effects of test-retest repeatability. METHODS: Contrast sensitivity measurements were obtained by presenting eight horizontal sine-wave gratings (ranging from 0.2 to 20 cycles per degree). A three-up-one-down method was used to obtain thresholds with a criterion of 79.4% correct responses for each spatial frequency. The mean of 12 reversals was used for obtaining thresholds, and the two-alternative forced-choice method was used. Data were recorded in 55 naive observers from 20 to 45 years. All participants were free from identifiable ocular disease and had normal visual acuity. RESULTS: We observed the absence of differences on CSF for both monocular and binocular observers, as well as the absence of differences between large sample sizes. The latter investigation revealed a high degree of repeatability across time (baseline to 6 months later) with the higher test-retest for low and high spatial frequencies. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicated that spatial contrast sensitivity measurements were little influenced by variables, such as binocular summation, eye dominance, sample size and time using the Metropsis test. The results obtained here have significance for basic and clinical vision science.