ArticlePloS one2021
Salzburg Visual Field Trainer (SVFT): A virtual reality device for (the evaluation of) neuropsychological rehabilitation.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Placebo effect after visual restitution training: no eye-tracking controlled perimetric improvement after visual border stimulation in late subacute and chronic visual field defects after stroke.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Patients Prefer a Virtual Reality Approach Over a Similarly Performing Screen-Based Approach for Continuous Oculomotor-Based Screening of Glaucomatous and Neuro-Ophthalmological Visual Field Defects.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Review
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objective"Visual Restitution Therapies" (VRT) claim to ameliorate visual field defects of neurological patients by repeated visual light stimulation, leading to training-related neuroplasticity and resulting in reconnection of lesioned neurons in early cortical areas. Because existing systems are stationary, uncomfortable, and unreliable, we developed a training instrument based on virtual reality goggles. The goal of the "Salzburg Visual Field Trainer" (SVFT) is twofold: (1) The device facilitates the clinical evaluation of established neuropsychological rehabilitation approaches, such as VRT. (2) The device enables patients to independently perform VRT based (or other) neuropsychological training methodologies flexibly and comfortably. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The SVFT was developed on the principles of VRT. Individual configuration of the SVFT is based on perimetric data of the respective patient's visual field. To validate the utmost important aspect of neuropsychological rehabilitation methodologies-that is displaying stimuli precisely in desired locations in the user's visual field-two steps were conducted in this proof-of-concept study: First, we assessed the individual "blind spots" location and extent of 40 healthy, normal sighted participants. This was done with the help of our recently developed perimetric methodology "Eye Tracking Based Visual Field Analysis" (EFA). Second, depending on the individual characteristics of every participant's blind spots, we displayed-by means of the SVFT-15 stimuli in the respective locations of every participants' blind spots and 85 stimuli in the surrounding, intact visual area. The ratio between visible and non-visible stimuli, which is reflected in the behavioral responses (clicks on a remote control) of the 40 participants, provides insight into the accuracy of the SVFT to display training stimuli in areas desired by the investigator. As the blind spot is a naturally occurring, absolute scotoma, we utilized this blind area as an objective criterion and a "simulated" visual field defect to evaluate the theoretical applicability of the SVFT.
resultsOutcomes indicate that the SVFT is highly accurate in displaying training stimuli in the desired areas of the user's visual field with an accuracy of 99.0%. Data analysis further showed a sensitivity of .98, specificity of .99, a positive predictive value of .96, a negative predictive value of .996, a hit rate of .99, a random hit rate of .74 and a RATZ-Index of .98. This translates to 14.7% correct non-reactions, 0.7% false non-reactions, 0.3% false reactions and 84.3% correct reactions to displayed test stimuli during the evaluation study. Reports from participants further indicate that the SVFT is comfortable to wear and intuitive to use.
conclusionsThe SVFT can help to investigate the true effects of VRT based methodologies (or other neuropsychological approaches) and the underlying mechanisms of training-related neuroplasticity in the visual cortex in neurological patients suffering from visual field defects.
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.