ArticleOphthalmology science
Esterman Visual Field Testing Using a Virtual Reality Headset in Glaucoma.
Article in Ophthalmology science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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 · 2026Article
- The Utility of Virtual Reality in Ophthalmology: A Review.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To test the use of a virtual reality visual field headset (VRVF) for implementation of the Esterman visual field (EVF) test as compared with standard automated perimetry (SAP) among people with glaucoma. Design: Experimental design. Subjects: Patients with mild to severe glaucoma ranging from 10 to 90 years who presented for follow-up at a glaucoma clinic in Miami, Florida were eligible. Methods: Participants performed the EVF test on both SAP and VRVF. Five glaucoma-trained ophthalmologists were then asked to rate all anonymized SAP and RVF tests as a "pass" or "failure" based on Florida state law. Main Outcome Measures: Point-by-point concordance between original VRVF EVF test results and SAP EVF test results was calculated using the Kappa statistic. Concordance between SAP and VRVF was secondarily assessed with a conditional logistic regression based on the pass-failure determinations by the glaucoma-trained ophthalmologists. Interrater agreement on test pass-failure determinations was also calculated. Finally, test results on SAP versus VRVF were compared based on Esterman efficiency score (EES), the number of correct points divided by the number of total points, and duration of testing. Results: Twenty-two subjects were included in the study with ages ranging from 14 to 78 years old. Concordance between VRVF and SAP test using point-by-point analysis was poor ( Conclusions: This pilot study is the first to assess the implementation of the EVF test using a virtual reality headset. Based on the weak overall agreement between VRVF and SAP, the current VRVF EVF test is not an acceptable determinant of driver's licensing. However, ophthalmologists were more likely to agree amongst themselves on VRVF test reports than on SAP reports. With further testing and improvement, virtual reality may eventually become a portable and convenient method for administering the EVF test. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
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.