Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38585168›Full record

ArticleJournal of current glaucoma practice

Prospective Comparison of VisuALL Virtual Reality Perimetry and Humphrey Automated Perimetry in Glaucoma.

Jeffrey M Griffin, Grant T Slagle, Truong A Vu, Ainsley Eis, William E Sponsel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of current glaucoma practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Home monitoring devices for glaucoma.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026
    Review
  3. Can digital perimetry deliver?Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. A comparative analysis of an AI-assisted virtual reality platform with technician-based examination for visual field, visual acuity, and color vision in neuro-ophthalmology.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

5 authors.

Jeffrey M GriffinDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, John Sealy School of Medicine, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3988-1832
Grant T SlagleDepartment of Ophthalmology, HCA Florida Bayonet Point Hospital, Hudson, Florida, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7963-2067
Truong A VuDepartment of Ophthalmology, School of Osteopathic Medicine, University of the Incarnate Word, San Antonio, Texas, United States.
Ainsley EisDepartment of Neuroscience, Trinity University, San Antonio, Texas, United States.
William E SponselDepartment of Vision Science, University of the Incarnate Word, San Antonio, Texas, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim and background: Automated perimetry plays an important role in the diagnosis and monitoring of glaucoma patients. The purpose of this study is to prospectively determine parity between Humphrey visual field analyzer (HVFA) perimetry (the current gold standard) and the VisuALL virtual reality perimeter (VRP). Materials and methods: In this prospective fully paired diagnostic accuracy study, patients with stable, long-term HVFA visual fields (horizontal dots for ≥4 consecutive visits on progression analysis) with preperimetric, mild, moderate, or severe visual field loss were familiarized with the VRP and then tested using its proprietary software. These results were used for point-by-point comparison with a contemporaneous HVFA test. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University of the Incarnate Word, San Antonio, Texas, United States of America (IRB approval #20-06-002). Results: The prospective study analyzed 43 eyes of 24 glaucoma patients. Spearman's correlation of mean deviation (MD) revealed a strong correlation between HVFA and VRP with r Conclusion: The parity between the VRP and HVFA was remarkably strong for mild and moderate glaucoma. Given its portability, ease of use, space efficiency, and low cost, the VRP presents a viable alternative. Clinical significance: Automated perimetry, specifically the HVFA, has been the gold standard for visual field assessment since its introduction. The recent COVID-19 pandemic has illuminated the advantages of the VRP, allowing for safer visual assessment for both patient and clinician alike. Our study hopes to establish parity between these systems, allowing for the efficient integration of a novel head-mounted perimetry system that can safely diagnose and monitor glaucomatous progression in clinical practice. Precis: Investigation of parity between Olleyes VisuALL virtual reality perimetry (VRP) and existing standard HVFA perimetry is essential to the diagnosis and management of glaucoma. Linear correlations between the two were established from 43 glaucomatous eyes. Parity was strong for mild and moderate glaucoma, presenting VRP as a viable alternative. How to cite this article: Griffin JM, Slagle GT, Vu TA,

Indexed as

GlaucomaHumphrey visual fieldPerimetryVirtual reality perimetryVisual field analysis

Identifiers

PMID38585168
PMCPMC10997963

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.