ReviewCurrent neurology and neuroscience reports2024
Interpretation of the Visual Field in Neuro-ophthalmic Disorders.
Review in Current neurology and neuroscience reports, 2024. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Visual Function in Alzheimer's Disease: Current Understanding and Potential Mechanisms Behind Visual Impairment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Advancements in Visual Field Testing: A Systematic Review of the 24-2C Test Grid.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Macular OCT's Proficiency in Identifying Retrochiasmal Visual Pathway Lesions in Multiple Sclerosis-A Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewIn this review, we will describe current methods for visual field testing in neuro-ophthalmic clinical practice and research, develop terminology that accurately describes patterns of field deficits, and discuss recent advances such as augmented or virtual reality-based perimetry and the use of artificial intelligence in visual field interpretation. RECENT
findingsNew testing strategies that reduce testing times, improve patient comfort, and increase sensitivity for detecting small central or paracentral scotomas have been developed for static automated perimetry. Various forms of machine learning-based tools such as archetypal analysis are being tested to quantitatively depict and monitor visual field abnormalities in optic neuropathies. Studies show that the combined use of optical coherence tomography and standard automated perimetry to determine the structure-function relationship improves clinical care in neuro-ophthalmic disorders. Visual field assessment must be performed in all patients with neuro-ophthalmic disorders affecting the afferent visual pathway. Quantitative visual field analysis using standard automated perimetry is critical in initial diagnosis, monitoring disease progression, and guidance of therapeutic plans. Visual field defects can adversely impact activities of daily living such as reading, navigation, and driving and thus impact quality of life. Visual field testing can direct appropriate occupational low vision rehabilitation in affected individuals.
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.