ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2021
Virtual Reality-Based and Conventional Visual Field Examination Comparison in Healthy and Glaucoma Patients.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.
- Virtual reality perimetry compared to standard automated perimetry in adults with glaucoma: A systematic review.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Virtual reality headsets for perimetry testing: a systematic review.Eye (London, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluation of a Head-Mounted Virtual Reality Perimeter Compared with Stationary Perimeters across All Stages of Glaucoma.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Comparison of virtual reality-based portable perimetry and conventional perimetry in patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- A comparative analysis of an AI-assisted virtual reality platform with technician-based examination for visual field, visual acuity, and color vision in neuro-ophthalmology.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Article
- Portable perimetry devices for glaucoma patients -practicality in daily clinical practice and glaucoma expert assessment.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Article
- Structure-Function Relationship Between Optic Nerve Head Morphometry and Virtual Reality-Based Perimetry in Open-Angle Glaucoma.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Virtual reality perimetry facilitates visual field evaluation in a previously non-assessable eye with severe glaucoma.American journal of ophthalmology case reports · 2025Article
- Clinical Assessment of a Virtual Reality Perimeter Versus the Humphrey Field Analyzer: Comparative Reliability, Usability, and Prospective Applications.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluating a virtual reality visual fields analyzer in an urban, underserved glaucoma & glaucoma suspect patient populations to identify disparities.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Clinical Validity of Commercially Available Virtual Reality Headsets for Visual Field Testing: A Systematic Review.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Comparative Analysis of Melbourne Rapid Fields Web-Browser Perimeter and Humphrey Field Analyzer in Chinese Glaucoma Patients.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Current perspectives in tackling glaucoma blindness.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2025Review
- Refining Glaucoma Management: Korean Population-Specific Findings from Visual Field and Optical Coherence Tomography Testing.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Luminance and thresholding limitations of virtual reality headsets for visual field testing.PloS one · 2025Article
- The Prevalence of Ophthalmic Diagnoses and Exam Findings in Emergency Department Consults at Two Academic Hospitals.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Virtual Reality Visual Field Testing in Glaucoma: Benefits and Drawbacks.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Review
- [Virtual reality perimetry and home perimetry].Die Ophthalmologie · 2024Review
- Development and evaluation of Order of Magnitude (OM): a virtual reality-based visual field analyzer for glaucoma detection.International ophthalmology · 2024Article
- The Role of Ophthalmology in Tele-Stroke Consults for Triaging Acute Vision Loss.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Clinically evaluate the noninferiority of a custom virtual reality (VR) perimetry system when compared to a clinically and routinely used perimeter on both healthy subjects and glaucoma patients. Methods: We use a custom-designed VR perimetry system tailored for visual field testing. The system uses Oculus Quest VR headset (Facebook Technologies, LLC, Bern, Switzerland), that includes a clicker for participant response feedback. A prospective, single center, study was conducted at the Department of Ophthalmology of the Bern University Hospital (Bern, Switzerland) for 12 months. Of the 114 participants recruited 70 subjects (36 healthy and 34 glaucoma patients with early to moderate visual field loss) were included in the study. Participants underwent perimetry tests on an Octopus 900 (Haag-Streit, Köniz, Switzerland) as well as on the custom VR perimeter. In both cases, standard dynamic strategy (DS) was used in conjunction with the G testing pattern. Collected visual fields (VFs) from both devices were then analyzed and compared. Results: High mean defect (MD) correlations between the two systems (Spearman, ρ ≥ 0.75) were obtained. The VR system was found to slightly underestimate VF defects in glaucoma subjects (1.4 dB). No significant bias was found with respect to eccentricity or subject age. On average, a similar number of stimuli presentations per VF was necessary when measuring glaucoma patients and healthy subjects. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that a clinically used perimeter and the proposed VR perimetry system have comparable performances with respect to a number of perimetry parameters in healthy and glaucoma patients with early to moderate visual field loss. Translational Relevance: This suggests that VR perimeters have the potential to assess VFs with high enough confidence, whereby alleviating challenges in current perimetry practices by providing a portable and more accessible visual field test.
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.