ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2024
Online Circular Contrast Perimetry via a Web-Application: Establishing a Normative Database for Central 10-Degree Perimetry.
Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2024. 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.
- Home monitoring devices for glaucoma.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Review
- Online circular contrast perimetry performed in glaucoma patients in Sub-Saharan Africa: a multi-centre comparative study in Nigeria.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- The Prevalence of Ophthalmic Diagnoses and Exam Findings in Emergency Department Consults at Two Academic Hospitals.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Glaucoma Clinic Monitoring Over 6 Months Using Online Circular Contrast Perimetry in Comparison with Standard Automatic Perimetry: The Developing-World Setting.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Consistency of Online Circular Contrast Perimetry Across Different Computer Monitors: A Cross-sectional Study.Journal of current glaucoma practiceArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To establish a normative database using a central 10-degree grid pattern for the online circular contrast perimetry (OCCP) application. Participants: Fifty participants with mean age 65 ± 13 years were selected for this study. One eye from each participant that met inclusion criteria was randomly included in the cohort. Methods: The web-application delivered online 52-loci perimetry in a central 10-degree pattern using circular flickering targets. These targets consist of concentric sinusoidal alternating contrast rings. Users were guided by the application to the correct viewing distance and head position using in-built blind spot localization and webcam monitoring. A spinning golden star was used as the fixation target and patients performed the test in a darkened room following standard automated perimetry (SAP). Results: The reliability rates and global indices for OCCP were similar to SAP. OCCP mean sensitivity reduced with age at a similar rate to SAP. Mean sensitivity per loci of 10-degree OCCP was greater than SAP by 1.24 log units (95% CI 1.23 to 1.26) and obeyed a physiological hill of vision. Small differences existed in mean sensitivities between OCCP and SAP which increased with increasing spot eccentricity. Mean deviation (MD) displayed good agreement between the two tests. Conclusion: Central 10-degree online circular contrast perimetry via a computer-based application has comparable perimetric results to standard automated perimetry in a normal cohort.
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.