ArticleAmerican journal of ophthalmology case reports2023
A case of functional visual loss diagnosed through bilateral randomized visual field testing with a trick method.
Article in American journal of ophthalmology case reports, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phenotypic Analysis of Intentionally Created Monocular Visual Field Defects During Bilateral Randomized Visual Field Testing Using the Imo VifaJournal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of visual function within the central 10 degrees using IMOvifa™ 24plus (1-2).PloS one · 2025Article
- Comparison of IMO vifa24plus(1-2) and Humphrey Field Analyzer 24-2.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To report a case of functional visual loss (FVL) diagnosed through bilateral randomized visual field testing using Imo vifa with a trick method. Observations: A 27-year-old man complained of visual field abnormality in his left eye after falling from a height of 4 m. The left eye had a best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) of 20/16 and a critical flicker frequency (CFF) of 44.5 Hz at the first visit. Commotio retinae was observed in the inferior retina of the left eye, and the pupillary light reflex was normal. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of the head revealed no abnormalities. However, the Goldmann perimeter (GP) showed constriction of visual field in the left eye. Since traumatic optic neuropathy was suspected initially; therefore, two courses of methylprednisolone pulse therapy were administered. However, the BCVA and CFF gradually worsened to 20/200 and 14 Hz, respectively. Nevertheless, his pupillary light reflex was still normal, and GP showed a spiral visual field. Thus, we suspected that this was a case of FVL and performed bilateral randomized visual field testing using Imo vifa in three steps as a trick method. In the first step, we performed the normal method for bilateral randomized visual field testing. In the second and third steps, we explained to the patient that only the right or left eye would be examined on purpose; bilateral randomized visual field testing was then performed. The results of examinations revealed left homonymous hemianopsias and normal and concentric contraction of the visual field in both eyes. These results could not be explained by organic disease, and the patient was diagnosed with FVL. Conclusions and Importance: Bilateral randomized visual field testing using Imo vifa with a trick method was useful for diagnosing FVL.
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.