Valeria Silvestri

Dr. Valeria Silvestri

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

14Years (2013-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
15 March 2013 in Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
FAFilippo Amore
Filippo Amore
RFRomina Fasciani
Romina Fasciani
VSValeria Silvestri
Valeria Silvestri
MCMichael D Crossland
Michael D Crossland
Chiara de WaureChiara de Waure
Chiara de Waure
ARAlfredo Reibaldi
Alfredo Reibaldi

1 October 2013 in Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FAFilippo Amore
Filippo Amore
SPSilvia Paliotta
Silvia Paliotta
VSValeria Silvestri
Valeria Silvestri
PPPaola Piscopo
Paola Piscopo
STSimona Turco
Simona Turco
ARAlfredo Reibaldi
Alfredo Reibaldi

17 March 2021 in Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
VSValeria Silvestri
Valeria Silvestri
STSimona Turco
Simona Turco
PPPaola Piscopo
Paola Piscopo
MGMargherita Guidobaldi
Margherita Guidobaldi
FPFabiana Perna
Fabiana Perna
FAFilippo Amore
Filippo Amore

4 September 2020 in Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
VSValeria Silvestri
Valeria Silvestri
PSPaola Sasso
Paola Sasso
PPPaola Piscopo
Paola Piscopo
FAFilippo Amore
Filippo Amore
SRStanislao Rizzo
Stanislao Rizzo
LTLuminita Tarita‐Nistor
Luminita Tarita‐Nistor
Purpose: There are conflicting reports as to whether there is a binocular advantage or disadvantage when reading with central vision loss. This study examined binocular reading summation in patients with macular degeneration. Methods: Seventy‐one patients with bilateral central vision loss [mean age: 63 (S.D. = 21) years] participated. Reading performances during binocular and monocular viewing with the better eye (i.e., the eye with the best monocular visual acuity) were evaluated using different versions of the Italian MNREAD reading chart ( www.precision‐vision.com ). Fixation stability and preferred retinal loci (PRLs) were recorded monocularly for each eye. The overall sample was split into inhibition, equality, and summation groups based on the binocular ratio (i.e., binocular/monocular) of the maximum reading speed. Results: 41% of patients experienced binocular inhibition, 42% summation, and 17% equality. Binocular reading speed of the inhibition group was approximately 30 words per minute slower than those of the equality and summation groups, although the inhibition group had the best visual acuity. These patients generally had monocular PRLs in non‐corresponding locations temporal or nasal to the scotoma, had the largest interocular acuity difference and lacked residual stereopsis. The three groups did not differ in fixational control, contrast sensitivity or critical print size. Conclusions: Equal proportions of patients with central vision loss show binocular reading summation and inhibition. Patients with binocular reading inhibition have poorer reading performance and different clinical characteristics than those with binocular reading summation and equality.

1 December 2019 in Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PSPaola Sasso
Paola Sasso
VSValeria Silvestri
Valeria Silvestri
MSMarco Sulfaro
Marco Sulfaro
ASAndrea Scupola
Andrea Scupola
RFRomina Fasciani
Romina Fasciani
FAFilippo Amore
Filippo Amore

1 October 2013 in Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FAFilippo Amore
Filippo Amore
VSValeria Silvestri
Valeria Silvestri
STSimona Turco
Simona Turco
FRFrancesca De Rossi
Francesca De Rossi
FCFilippo Cruciani
Filippo Cruciani