Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22742888›Full record

Trial reportTrials2012

Efficacy of vision restoration therapy after optic neuritis (VISION study): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Johann Schinzel, Lina Schwarzlose, Holger Dietze, Karolina Bartusch, Susanne Weiss, Stephanie Ohlraun, Friedemann Paul, Jan Dörr

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01274702 (Visual Reconstitution Therapy After Optic Neuritis), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01274702 phase2completednot on this map

Visual Reconstitution Therapy After Optic Neuritis

TypeinterventionalSponsorFriedemann PaulRan2010 to 2013Enrolled25ConditionsOptic Neuritis, Multiple SclerosisArmsVisual Reconstitutions Therapy, Saccadic Eye Movement Training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Johann SchinzelNeuroCure Clinical Research Center, Charité - Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Lina Schwarzlose
Holger Dietze
Karolina Bartusch
Susanne Weiss
Stephanie Ohlraun
Friedemann Paul
Jan Dörr
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEBerliner Hochschule für Technik · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOptic neuritis is a frequent manifestation of multiple sclerosis. Visual deficits range from a minor impairment of visual functions through to complete loss of vision. Although many patients recover almost completely, roughly 35% of patients remain visually impaired for years, and therapeutic options for those patients hardly exist. Vision restoration therapy is a software-based visual training program that has been shown to improve visual deficits after pre- and postchiasmatic injury. The aim of this pilot study is to evaluate whether residual visual deficits after past or recent optic neuritis can be reduced by means of vision restoration therapy. METHODS/

designA randomized, controlled, patient- and observer-blinded clinical pilot study (VISION study) was designed to evaluate the efficacy of vision restoration therapy in optic neuritis patients. Eighty patients with a residual visual deficit after optic neuritis (visual acuity ≤0.7 and/or scotoma) will be stratified according to the time of optic neuritis onset (manifestation more than 12 months ago (40 patients, fixed deficit) versus manifestation 2 to 6 months ago (40 patients, recent optic neuritis)), and randomized into vision restoration therapy arm or saccadic training arm (control intervention). Patients will be instructed to complete a computer-based visual training for approximately 30 minutes each day for a period of 6 months. Patients and evaluators remain blinded to the treatment allocation throughout the study. All endpoints will be analyzed and P-values < 0.05 will be considered statistically significant. The primary outcome parameter will be the expansion of the visual field after 3 and 6 months of treatment as determined by static visual field perimetry and high resolution perimetry. Secondary outcome variables will include visual acuity at both low and high contrast, glare contrast sensitivity, visually evoked potentials, optical coherence tomography and other functional tests of the visual system, alertness, health-related quality of life, fatigue, and depression. DISCUSSION: If vision restoration therapy is shown to improve visual function after optic neuritis, this method might be a first therapeutic option for patients with incomplete recovery from optic neuritis.

trial registrationNCT01274702.

Indexed as

Research DesignTherapy, Computer-AssistedVision, OcularContrast SensitivityDouble-Blind MethodEvoked Potentials, VisualGermanyHumansOptic NeuritisPatient SelectionPhotic StimulationPilot ProjectsQuality of LifeRecovery of FunctionScotomaSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID22742888
PMCPMC3408329
OpenAlexW2140973658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.