Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38488433›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2024

Validation of a Wearable Virtual Reality Perimeter for Glaucoma Staging, The NOVA Trial: Novel Virtual Reality Field Assessment.

Chris Bradley, Iqbal Ike K Ahmed, Thomas W Samuelson, Michael Chaglasian, Howard Barnebey, Nathan Radcliffe, Jason Bacharach

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06549010 (A Pilot Study on the Repeatability of a Novel Perimetric Test Administered Via a Virtual Reality Headset.), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06549010 narecruitingnot on this map

A Pilot Study on the Repeatability of a Novel Perimetric Test Administered Via a Virtual Reality Headset.

TypeinterventionalSponsorEnvision Health Technologies, Inc.Ran2024 to 2024Enrolled60ConditionsGlaucomaArmsPerimetric test
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Early diagnostics and interventional glaucoma.Therapeutic advances in ophthalmology
    Review
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

7 authors.

Chris BradleyWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Iqbal Ike K AhmedDepartment of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Thomas W SamuelsonMinnesota Eye Consultants, Excelsior, MN, USA.
Michael ChaglasianIllinois College of Optometry, Chicago, IL, USA.
Howard BarnebeySpecialty Eyecare Centre, Bellevue, WA, USA.
Nathan RadcliffeNew York Eye Surgery Center, Bronx, NY, USA.
Jason BacharachNorth Bay Eye Associates, Petaluma, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Compare estimated sensitivities of SITA-Standard to the RATA-Standard algorithm of the Radius virtual reality perimeter (VRP), and measure concordance in glaucoma staging. Methods: One hundred adult glaucoma patients-half with suspect or mild glaucoma, and half with moderate or severe-from five clinics performed four 24-2 visual field tests during a single visit, two with the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) and two with Radius, in randomized order: HRHR or RHRH. Only one eye was tested per participant. We used the Wilcoxon rank sum test with Bonferroni correction to compare distributions of estimated sensitivities across all 54 test locations over the 15 to 40 dB measurement range of the Radius. Weighted kappa measured concordance in glaucoma staging between two masked glaucoma experts using Medicare definitions of severity. Results: A total of 62 OD and 38 OS eyes were tested. Estimated sensitivities for SITA-Standard and RATA-Standard were not significantly different for OD, but were for OS-likely because of SITA-Standard OD and OS being significantly different in our sample, but not for RATA-Standard. Low agreement was observed between 15 to 22 dB. Concordance in glaucoma staging was high for both graders: kappa = 0.91 and kappa = 0.93. Average test duration was 298 seconds for RATA-Standard and 341 seconds for SITA-Standard. The correlation in mean deviation was 0.94. Conclusions: Estimated sensitivities of RATA-Standard are comparable to SITA-Standard between 23 to 40 dB with high concordance in glaucoma staging. Translational Relevance: Radius VRP is statistically noninferior to HFA when staging glaucoma using Medicare definitions.

Indexed as

GlaucomaVirtual RealityWearable Electronic DevicesAdultAgedHumansMedicareReproducibility of ResultsUnited StatesVision DisordersVisual FieldsVisual Field Tests

Identifiers

PMID38488433
PMCPMC10946691

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.