Trial reportJAMA ophthalmology2014
Randomized crossover clinical trial of real and sham peripheral prism glasses for hemianopia.
Trial report in JAMA ophthalmology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00494676 (Community-based Multi-center Randomized Control Trial of Peripheral Prism Glasses for Hemianopia), which is not on this map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Community-based Multi-center Randomized Control Trial of Peripheral Prism Glasses for Hemianopia
Who cites it
40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 94 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for visual field defects in people with stroke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Adaptation to poststroke visual field loss: A systematic review.Brain and behavior · 2018Pooled it
- The treatment methods for post-stroke visual impairment: A systematic review.Brain and behavior · 2017Pooled it
- Reinforcement-Based Head Scan Training for Drivers With Homonymous Visual Field Loss: Improves Blind-Side Detection.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2026Trial
- Boosting hemianopia recovery: the power of interareal cross-frequency brain stimulation.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2025Trial
- Supervised and unsupervised rehabilitation of visual field defect: cohort investigation of eye movement training at a clinical setting and at home.Experimental brain research · 2025Article
- Pilot study of a pedestrian collision detection test for a multisite trial of field expansion devices for hemianopia.Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry · 2024Article
- The effects of an electronic head-mounted display in vision rehabilitation for patients with tunnel vision.International ophthalmology · 2024Article
- The effect of visual rivalry in peripheral head-mounted displays on mobility.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Gaze Scanning at Street Crossings by Pedestrians With Homonymous Hemianopia With and Without Hemispatial Neglect.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2023Article
- Oblique multi-periscopic prism for field expansion of homonymous hemianopia.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
- Development and 5-year Evaluation of Diagnosis-Specific Protocols for Visual Neuro-Rehabilitation in a Multicenter Inpatient Rehabilitation Network.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2023Article
- Effects of Perceptual-motor Training on Collision Judgments with Peripheral Prism Expanded Vision.Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry · 2022Article
- Visual Field Loss: Integrating Overlayed Information to Increase the Effective Field of View.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Rehabilitation of visual perception in cortical blindness.Handbook of clinical neurology · 2022Review
- Rehabilitation of cortically induced visual field loss.Current opinion in neurology · 2021Review
- 2017 Charles F. Prentice Award Lecture: Peripheral Prisms for Visual Field Expansion: A Translational Journey.Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry · 2020Article
- Multi-periscopic prism device for field expansion.Biomedical optics express · 2020Article
- Update on the Clinical Approach to Spatial Neglect.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2019Review
- Field Expansion for Acquired Monocular Vision Using a Multiplexing Prism.Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
importanceThere is a major lack of randomized controlled clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of prismatic treatments for hemianopia. Evidence for their effectiveness is mostly based on anecdotal case reports and open-label evaluations without a control condition.
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of real relative to sham peripheral prism glasses for patients with complete homonymous hemianopia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsDouble-masked, randomized crossover trial at 13 study sites, including the Peli laboratory at Schepens Eye Research Institute, 11 vision rehabilitation clinics in the United States, and 1 in the United Kingdom. Patients were 18 years or older with complete homonymous hemianopia for at least 3 months and without visual neglect or significant cognitive decline.
interventionPatients were allocated by minimization into 2 groups. One group received real (57-prism diopter) oblique and sham (<5-prism diopter) horizontal prisms; the other received real horizontal and sham oblique, in counterbalanced order. Each crossover period was 4 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the overall difference, across the 2 periods of the crossover, between the proportion of participants who wanted to continue with (said yes to) real prisms and the proportion who said yes to sham prisms. The secondary outcome was the difference in perceived mobility improvement between real and sham prisms.
resultsOf 73 patients randomized, 61 completed the crossover. A significantly higher proportion said yes to real than sham prisms (64% vs 36%; odds ratio, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.8-21.0). Participants who continued wear after 6 months reported greater improvement in mobility with real than sham prisms at crossover end (P = .002); participants who discontinued wear reported no difference. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Real peripheral prism glasses were more helpful for obstacle avoidance when walking than sham glasses, with no differences between the horizontal and oblique designs. Peripheral prism glasses provide a simple and inexpensive mobility rehabilitation intervention for hemianopia.
trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00494676.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.