Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33436922›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

A case control study examining the feasibility of using eye tracking perimetry to differentiate patients with glaucoma from healthy controls.

Andrew J Tatham, Ian C Murray, Alice D McTrusty, Lorraine A Cameron, Antonios Perperidis, Harry M Brash, Brian W Fleck, Robert A Minns

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew J TathamUniversity of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. andrewjtatham@gmail.com.
Ian C MurrayUniversity of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Alice D McTrustyUniversity of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Lorraine A CameronUniversity of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Antonios PerperidisUniversity of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Harry M BrashUniversity of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Brian W FleckUniversity of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Robert A MinnsUniversity of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
University of Edinburgh · GBRoyal Hospital for Sick Children · GBGlasgow Caledonian University · GB

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 049574
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To explore the feasibility of using Saccadic Vector Optokinetic Perimetry (SVOP) to differentiate glaucomatous and healthy eyes. A prospective case-control study was performed using a convenience sample recruited from a single university glaucoma clinic and a group of healthy controls. SVOP and standard automated perimetry (SAP) was performed with testing order randomised. The reference standard was a diagnosis of glaucoma based a comprehensive ophthalmic examination and abnormality on standard automated perimetry (SAP). The index test was SVOP. 31 patients with glaucoma and 24 healthy subjects were included. Mean SAP mean deviation (MD) in those with glaucoma was - 8.7 ± 7.4 dB, with mean SAP and SVOP sensitivities of 23.3 ± 0.9 dB and 22.1 ± 4.3 dB respectively. Participants with glaucoma were significantly older. On average, SAP sensitivity was 1.2 ± 1.4 dB higher than SVOP (95% limits of agreement = - 1.6 to 4.0 dB). SVOP sensitivity had good ability to differentiate healthy and glaucomatous eyes with a 95% CI for area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84 to 0.96, similar to the performance of SAP sensitivity (95% CI 0.86 to 0.97, P = 0.60). For 80% specificity, SVOP had a 95% CI sensitivity of 75.7% to 94.8% compared to 77.8% to 96.0% for SAP. SVOP took considerably longer to perform (514 ± 54 s compared to 267 ± 76 s for SAP). Eye tracking perimetry may be useful for detection of glaucoma but further studies are needed to evaluate SVOP within its intended sphere of use, using an appropriate design and independent reference standard.

Indexed as

AgedArea Under CurveCase-Control StudiesEye-Tracking TechnologyFeasibility StudiesFemaleGlaucomaHumansIntraocular PressureMaleProspective StudiesSaccadesVisual Field Tests

Identifiers

PMID33436922
PMCPMC7804427
OpenAlexW3119549006

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.