Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30234829›Full record

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

iPhone-based Pupillometry: A Novel Approach for Assessing the Pupillary Light Reflex.

J Jason McAnany, Brandon M Smith, Amy Garland, Steven L Kagen

Open access · hybridAbstract 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. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. IMI-Instrumentation for Myopia Management.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025
    Review
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Application of Pupillometry in Neurocritical Patients.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023
    Review
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

J Jason McAnanyDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Brandon M SmithDepartment of Computer Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin.
Amy GarlandKagenAir, LLC, Appleton, Wisconsin *Steve@KagenAir.com.
Steven L Kagen
Appleton Public Library · USUniversity of Illinois Chicago · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Translational Core for Therapeutic and Diagnostic DevelopmentP30EY001792 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI AAKALU, VINAY · 1985 to 2025
$14.8M
Mechanisms of Early Functional Loss in Diabetic Eye DiseaseR01EY026004 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI James JASON McAnany · 2016 to 2026
$4.2M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY001792NEI NIH HHS R01 EY026004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

significanceThe response of the pupil to a flash of light, the pupillary light reflex (PLR), is an important measure in optometry and in other fields of medicine that is typically evaluated by qualitative observation. Here we describe a simple, portable, iPhone-based pupillometer that quantifies the PLR in real time. PURPOSES: The purposes of this study were to describe a novel application that records the PLR and to compare its technical capabilities with a laboratory-based infrared (IR) camera system.

methodsPupil sizes were measured from 15 visually normal subjects (age, 19 to 65 years) using an IR camera system and the Sensitometer test. This test elicits pupillary constriction using the iPhone flash, records pupil size using the camera, and provides measurements in real time. Simultaneous recordings were obtained with the Sensitometer test and IR camera, and two measures were calculated: (1) dark-adapted steady-state pupil size and (2) minimum pupil size after the flash. The PLR was defined as the difference between these two measures. Pupil size was also recorded during the redilation phase after the flash. Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess the limits of agreement between the two methods.

resultsStatistically significant correlations between the IR and Sensitometer test measures were found for the PLR (r = 0.91, P < .001) and redilation size (r = 0.65, P = .03). Bland-Altman analysis indicated a mean PLR difference of 6% between these two methods. The PLR limit of agreement was 14%, indicating that 95% of subjects are expected to have IR and Sensitometer test measurements that differ by 14% or less. Bland-Altman analysis indicated a mean redilation size difference of 1% between the two methods; the limit of agreement was 5%.

conclusionsThere is excellent agreement between pupil responses recorded using the Sensitometer test and IR camera. The Sensitometer test provides a highly promising approach for simple, portable, inexpensive pupillary measurements.

Indexed as

LightAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPupilReaction TimeReflex, PupillarySmartphoneVision, OcularVision TestsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30234829
PMCPMC6166694
OpenAlexW2894813983

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.