ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2020
Hazard Detection With Monocular Bioptic Telescopes in a Driving Simulator.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Saccadic Reaction Times and Computational Modelling Reveal Heterogeneous Binocular Summation in Glaucomatous Visual Fields.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Article
- Naturalistic driving data extraction and processing for studying driver head scanning behavior at intersections.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A review of optical and digital aids for magnification techniques in low-vision rehabilitation.Journal of biological methods · 2025Review
- Hazard Perception in Visually Impaired Drivers Who Use Bioptic Telescopes.Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
- Bioptic Telescope Use in Naturalistic Driving by People with Visual Impairment.Translational vision science & technology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: In most states, people with reduced visual acuity may legally drive with the aid of a bioptic telescope. However, concerns have been raised that the ring scotoma may impair detection of peripheral hazards. Using a driving simulator, we tested the hypothesis that the fellow eye would be able to compensate for the ring scotoma when using a monocular telescope. Methods: Sixteen bioptic users completed three drives with binocular viewing interleaved between three drives with monocular viewing. Forty pedestrians appeared and ran on the road for 1 second, including 26 within the ring scotoma, while participants were reading road signs through their own monocular telescopes. Head movements were analyzed to determine whether the pedestrian appeared before or only while using the telescope. Results: For pedestrians that appeared only during bioptic use and were likely in the area of the ring scotoma, detection rates were significantly higher in binocular (fellow eye can compensate) than monocular (fellow eye patched) viewing (69% vs. 32%; Conclusions: Both current and noncurrent drivers' fellow eyes were able to compensate, at least in part, for the ring scotoma. Translational Relevance: When using monocular telescopes, the fellow eye reduces the impact of the ring scotoma on hazard detection in binocular viewing.
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.