Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39906054›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of sports physical therapy2025

Assessing the Inter-Rater and Inter-Trial Reliability of the NeurOptics Pupillary Light Response-3000 Pupillometer.

Deborah A Jehu, Lori A Bolgla, Samantha Armas, Forest Dutton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of sports physical therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Deborah A JehuInterdisciplinary Health Sciences Augusta University.
Lori A BolglaPhysical Therapy Augusta University.
Samantha ArmasInterdisciplinary Health Sciences Augusta University.
Forest DuttonPhysical Therapy Augusta University.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: An automated pupillometer is a handheld device used to stimulate the pupillary light response (PLR) and track the entirety of the response from constriction to dilation. Pupillometers provide objective data that clinicians can use to identify and assess brain injury. The validity of these devices has been previously established; however, the inter-rater and inter-trial reliability are unknown. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess the inter-rater and inter-trial reliability of the NeurOptics PLR-3000 pupillometer device in measuring pupil size changes, constriction velocities, and dilation velocities. The authors hypothesized that inter-rater and inter-trial reliability would have intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) greater than or equal to 0.70 for all PLR parameters. Study: Design: Observational, reliability study Methods: Forty-eight healthy adults (age 18-40 years) without a history of neurological injury, optical surgery, or cognitive impairment participated. Two independent raters used the NeurOptics PLR-3000 to measure PLR parameters in the left and right eyes of each subject. Data for the average and individual trials of each PLR parameter were used to determine inter-rater and inter-trial reliability, respectively. Inter-rater and inter-trial reliability was evaluated using descriptive statistics, ICC, the standard error of measurement, Bland-Altman plots, and the minimal detectable change. Results: Seven out of eight NeurOptics 3000-PLR parameters demonstrated moderate-to-excellent inter-rater (ICC range 0.72-0.96) and good-to-excellent inter-trial reliability (ICC range 0.76-0.98). The 75% recovery time parameter exhibited moderate inter-rater (ICC range 0.64-0.67) and poor-to-moderate inter-trial (ICC range 0.41-0.65) reliability. Conclusion: The NeurOptics 3000-PLR demonstrated acceptable reliability in measuring initial and end pupil size, constriction and dilation velocity, and latency to change between different users and trials. However, the device exhibited unacceptable reliability when measuring the time to 75% pupil size recovery. The device can be used in detecting and monitoring brain injury but should be limited to reliable measures only.

Indexed as

psychometricspupillary light reflexpupillary light responsepupillometry

Identifiers

PMID39906054
PMCPMC11788083

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.