Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41140910›Full record

ArticleOphthalmology science2026

Evaluating Increment and Decrement Stimuli Responses in Patients with Glaucoma Using Virtual Reality-Based Perimetry.

Albert Xu, Allen Khudaverdyan, Corinne Shiu, Michael Deiner, Murtaza Saifee, James J Blaha, Benjamin T Backus, Yvonne Ou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmology science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Albert XuDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, California.
Allen KhudaverdyanDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, California.
Corinne ShiuDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, California.
Michael DeinerDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, California.
Murtaza SaifeeDavidorf Eye Group, West Hills, California.
James J BlahaVivid Vision Inc, San Francisco, California.
Benjamin T BackusVivid Vision Inc, San Francisco, California.
Yvonne OuDepartment of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, California.

Funding

Rapid-Prototyping and Design CoreP30EY002162 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI ULLIAN, ERIK M · 1985 to 2024
$16.8M
Vision Bioinformatics and ComputationP30EY037668 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Erik M Ullian · 2025 to 2026
$2.0M
Clustered home assessment of visual fields in patients with glaucomaR44EY035203 · NEI · VIVID VISION, INC. · PI BACKUS, BENJAMIN T · 2023 to 2024
$1.6M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY002162NEI NIH HHS P30 EY037668NEI NIH HHS R44 EY035203
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate increment and decrement stimuli responses in glaucoma using a virtual reality-based perimetric system, Vivid Vision Perimetry (VVP) and to compare these findings with conventional perimetry. Design: This is a cross-sectional study involving participants with diagnosed perimetric glaucoma, preperimetric glaucoma, and glaucoma suspect or ocular hypertension. Participants: Sixty-nine participants (mean age: 66.9 years; 50.7% female) were recruited from ophthalmology clinics at the University of California, San Francisco, California, United States. Eyes were grouped clinically into perimetric glaucoma (62 eyes), preperimetric glaucoma (31 eyes), and glaucoma suspect or ocular hypertension (41 eyes). Methods: Increment and decrement stimuli were tested at 12 locations per eye using the VVP system. Main Outcome Measures: Contrast sensitivities (CSs) were recorded and mean CS was computed and compared between VVP and conventional perimetry (Humphrey Visual Field [HVF]). Correlations between VVP and HVF results were computed, and statistical analyses were conducted using cluster bootstrapping to account for intereye correlations. Results: Perimetric glaucoma eyes had stronger correlation of CS between VVP and HVF tests compared to preperimetric glaucoma and glaucoma suspect or ocular hypertension eyes. Across all groups, decrement testing generally showed higher correlations than increment testing (perimetric: 0.48 [increment] vs. 0.61 [decrement]; preperimetric: 0.24 vs. 0.37; glaucoma suspect: 0.35 vs. 0.36). In perimetric glaucoma, particularly in moderate to severe cases, there was a significantly greater CS to decrement stimuli compared to increment stimuli (-1.46 decibels [dB] [95% confidence interval [CI]: -2.59, -0.30]). Preperimetric glaucoma eyes had significantly higher CS to increment stimuli than to decrement stimuli (+0.86 dB [95% CI: 0.11, 1.67]). Throughout all clinical subtypes, areas of the visual field with higher contrast thresholds (lower sensitivity) showed greater sensitivity to increment stimuli, whereas areas with lower contrast thresholds (higher sensitivity) showed greater sensitivity to decrement stimuli (perimetric: m = 0.63, R = 0.71; preperimetric: m = 0.50, R = 0.6; glaucoma suspect: m = 0.45, R = 0.51; all Conclusions: We found significant differences in how preperimetric and perimetric glaucoma eyes respond to varying stimuli. Preperimetric eyes were better at detecting increment stimuli, while perimetric eyes were better at detecting decrement stimuli. Our results confirm earlier studies reporting greater OFF-pathway vulnerability in early glaucoma but suggest a shift to ON-pathway vulnerability in severe glaucoma. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Indexed as

GlaucomaIncrement/decrement stimuliON/OFF pathwayPerimetryVirtual reality

Identifiers

PMID41140910
PMCPMC12548083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.