ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2022
Driving and exceptional cases: Supporting relicensing evaluation in patients whose visual fields fail to meet standards.
Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 2022. 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.
- Diagnostics and rehabilitation of post-stroke visual field loss using innovative visual field evaluation. The impact of losing driving privileges (DRIVE-study): Protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2026Article
- Head Scanning by Drivers With Left Homonymous Visual Field Loss: A Naturalistic Driving Pilot Study.The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association · 2026Article
- Development of a reliability criterion for the binocular Esterman visual field test.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Validation of the European visual field standards for driving: A driving simulator-based study.Acta ophthalmologica · 2025Article
- Driving and exceptional cases: Supporting relicensing evaluation in patients whose visual fields fail to meet standards.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2022Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe UK Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency's (DVLA) visual field criteria mean that homonymous defects close to fixation are not usually acceptable for driving. Here, we illustrate cases where patients with field defects failing to meet standards had their licences revoked but subsequently were permitted to drive again through exceptional case provisions.
methodsClinical assessment of two patients with homonymous loss: a 62-year-old man (PWT) with a dense left upper homonymous quadrantanopia secondary to a right occipital lobe stroke and a 48-year-old woman (JC), only aware of right upper homonymous quadrantanopia following routine primary care assessment and subsequently attributed to left middle cerebral artery stroke from perinatal intracranial haemorrhage.
resultsPWT's Esterman test showed a significant central defect failing to meet the standard. His subsequent ophthalmic examination was otherwise unremarkable with excellent visual functions. Clinical evidence was provided supporting his relicensing application, and in time, a practical DVLA driving assessment indicated adaptation had been successful, and his licence was restored. JC's defect also failed to meet the standard, and her licence was revoked. Her ophthalmic examination was otherwise unremarkable, and her condition was attributed to a nonprogressive, isolated perinatal event. The DVLA accepted supporting clinical evidence; her subsequent practical driving assessment demonstrated successful adaptation and her licence was also restored.
conclusionsConventional visual field tests are not necessarily predictive of real-world driving performance, with drivers' adaptive strategies not being accommodated. In the UK, individuals with visual field loss failing to meet the standard may be eligible for relicensing as exceptional cases if specific criteria can be met. For exceptional cases potentially licensable under these criteria, the DVLA requires clinician support and a satisfactory practical driving assessment. Similar provisions exist internationally. Clinicians need to be aware of the role they may play in such scenarios.
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.