Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30169356›Full record

ArticleOptometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry2018

No Useful Field Expansion with Full-field Prisms.

Jae-Hyun Jung, Eli Peli

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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.

NCT06024668 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Monocular Visual Confusion for Field Expansion

TypeinterventionalSponsorMassachusetts Eye and Ear InfirmaryRan2024 to 2025Enrolled0ConditionsOne Eye Blindness, Blind Left Eye, Blind Right EyeArmsMultiplexing Prism
NCT06027216 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Monocular Visual Confusion for Field Expansion

TypeinterventionalSponsorMassachusetts Eye and Ear InfirmaryRan2023 to 2024Enrolled30ConditionsOne Eye Blindness, Blind Left Eye, Blind Right EyeArmsMultiplexing Prism
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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 · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Field Expansion for Acquired Monocular Vision Using a Multiplexing Prism.Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry · 2018
    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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jae-Hyun Jung
Eli PeliSchepens Eye Research Institute, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts *jaehyun_jung@meei.harvard.edu.
Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary · US

Funding

VISION RESEARCHP30EY003790 · NEI · SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI Patricia Ann D'Amore · 1985 to 2026
$25.5M
VISUAL FIELD EXPANSION THROUGH INNOVATIVE MULTIPLEXING PRISM DESIGNR01EY023385 · NEI · SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI PELI, ELI · 2013 to 2024
$7.2M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY003790NEI NIH HHS R01 EY023385
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

significanceFull-field prisms that fill the entire spectacle eye wire have been considered as field expansion devices for homonymous hemianopia (HH) and acquired monocular vision (AMV). Although the full-field prism is used for addressing binocular dysfunction and for prism adaptation training after brain injury as treatment for spatial hemineglect, we show that the full-field prism for field expansion does not effectively expand the visual field in either HH or AMV. PURPOSE: Full-field prisms may shift a portion of the blind side to the residual seeing side. However, foveal fixation on an object of interest through a full-field prism requires head and/or eye rotation away from the blind side, thus negating the shift of the field toward the blind side.

methodsWe fit meniscus and flat full-field 7Δ and 12Δ yoked prisms and conducted Goldmann perimetry in HH and AMV. We compared the perimetry results with ray tracing calculations.

resultsThe rated prism power was in effect at the primary position of gaze for all prisms, and the meniscus prisms maintained almost constant power at all eccentricities. To fixate on the perimetry target, the subjects needed to turn their head and/or eyes away from the blind side, which negated the field shift into the blind side. In HH, there was no difference in the perimetry results on the blind side with any of the prisms. In AMV, the lower nasal field of view was slightly shifted into the blind side with the flat prisms, but not with the meniscus prisms.

conclusionsFull-field prisms are not an effective field expansion device owing to the inevitable fixation shift. There is potential for a small field shift with the flat full-field prism in AMV, but such lenses cannot incorporate refractive correction. Furthermore, in considering the apical scotoma, the shift provides a mere field substitution at best.

Indexed as

EyeglassesFixation, OcularHemianopsiaHumansMaleMiddle AgedVision, BinocularVision, MonocularVision, OcularVision TestsVisual FieldsVisual Field Tests

Identifiers

PMID30169356
PMCPMC6121738
OpenAlexW2889430985

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.