ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2025
Eyecatcher 3.0 - Validating the Use of "Smart Glasses" as a Low-Cost, Portable Method of Assessing Visual Fields.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2025. 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.
- Comparison of portable devices with standard glaucoma diagnostic testing for the detection of glaucoma for the purposes of glaucoma case finding in low-and middle- income countries.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Feasibility and performance of eye movement perimetry for glaucoma triage in Tanzania: A prospective cross-sectional study in a real-world setting.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Glaucoma requires regular visual field (VF) assessments. Eyecatcher 3.0 uses novel "smart glasses" hardware to provide a lightweight, low-cost solution, designed for use while unsupervised. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of using Eyecatcher for VF home-monitoring. Methods: Eyecatcher 3.0 consists of a smartphone, smart glasses, and wireless clicker. Functionally, it attempts to mimic the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA; - same task-instructions, stimuli, and outputs, but smaller field of view and luminance range). Five patients with glaucoma used Eyecatcher to test themselves at home for 3 months (both eyes, monocular, once-per-fortnight). Results from a reduced 24-2 grid were compared to HFA data collected in the clinic, and to normative Eyecatcher data collected from 76 normally sighted young adults. A subset of normally sighted participants (n = 16) also underwent two additional sessions of follow-up testing to assess repeatability. Usability was assessed via questionnaires. Results: All Eyecatcher tests were completed successfully (100%). There was reasonable agreement with the HFA in terms of mean deviation (MD; r = 0.85, P < 0.001) and observed pattern of loss. The HFA exhibited somewhat better repeatability than Eyecatcher (MD Coefficient of Repeatability = 2.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.1-4.1 decibels [dB] for HFA, vs. 3.9, 95% CI = 2.8-6.1 dB for Eyecatcher), although this difference was not statistically significant. Average Eyecatcher test duration was 6.5 minutes (both eyes). Patients generally rated the Eyecatcher as easy-to-use, although specific concerns were raised by some individuals. Conclusions: Smart glasses may provide a feasible means of VFs home-monitoring. Eyecatcher yielded similar sensitivity values to the HFA, and most participants found the lightweight smart glasses acceptable to use. Further research is needed to establish diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility. Translational Relevance: Validation of a new method of glaucoma home monitoring.
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.