Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37856179›Full record

Observational studyJournal of medical Internet research2023

Remote Perimetry in a Virtual Reality Metaverse Environment for Out-of-Hospital Functional Eye Screening Compared Against the Gold Standard Humphrey Visual Fields Perimeter: Proof-of-Concept Pilot Study.

Kang-An Wong, Bryan Chin Hou Ang, Dinesh Visva Gunasekeran, Rahat Husain, Joewee Boon, Krishna Vikneson, Zyna Pei Qi Tan, Gavin Siew Wei Tan, Tien Yin Wong, Rupesh Agrawal

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Interpretation of the Visual Field in Neuro-ophthalmic Disorders.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2024
    Review
  6. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Kang-An Wong *National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0009-0007-2557-2725
Bryan Chin Hou Ang *National Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-8256-4894
Dinesh Visva GunasekeranNational University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-8502-2334
Rahat HusainSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-5234-9621
Joewee BoonNational Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0009-0001-0112-0675
Krishna ViknesonSchool of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0724-6615
Zyna Pei Qi TanNational Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0009-0002-3265-6234
Gavin Siew Wei TanSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-5383-7136
Tien Yin WongSingapore Eye Research Institute, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-8448-1264
Rupesh AgrawalNational Healthcare Group Eye Institute, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-6662-5850
Tan Tock Seng Hospital · SGNational University of Singapore · SGSingapore General Hospital · SGUNSW Sydney · AUNanyang Technological University · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe growing global burden of visual impairment necessitates better population eye screening for early detection of eye diseases. However, accessibility to testing is often limited and centralized at in-hospital settings. Furthermore, many eye screening programs were disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, presenting an urgent need for out-of-hospital solutions.

objectiveThis study investigates the performance of a novel remote perimetry application designed in a virtual reality metaverse environment to enable functional testing in community-based and primary care settings.

methodsThis was a prospective observational study investigating the performance of a novel remote perimetry solution in comparison with the gold standard Humphrey visual field (HVF) perimeter. Subjects received a comprehensive ophthalmologic assessment, HVF perimetry, and remote perimetry testing. The primary outcome measure was the agreement in the classification of overall perimetry result normality by the HVF (Swedish interactive threshold algorithm-fast) and testing with the novel algorithm. Secondary outcome measures included concordance of individual testing points and perimetry topographic maps.

resultsWe recruited 10 subjects with an average age of 59.6 (range 28-81) years. Of these, 7 (70%) were male and 3 (30%) were female. The agreement in the classification of overall perimetry results was high (9/10, 90%). The pointwise concordance in the automated classification of individual test points was 83.3% (8.2%; range 75%-100%). In addition, there was good perimetry topographic concordance with the HVF in all subjects.

conclusionsRemote perimetry in a metaverse environment had good concordance with gold standard perimetry using the HVF and could potentially avail functional eye screening in out-of-hospital settings.

Indexed as

GlaucomaVisual Field TestsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsPilot ProjectsProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsVisual Fieldsdigital healtheyefunctional testingglaucomaHVFmetaverseophthalmologicophthalmologyperimetry testremote carescreeningvirtual realityvisual fieldvisual impairmentvisually impaired

Identifiers

PMID37856179
PMCPMC10623222
OpenAlexW4387764613

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.