Trial reportFrontiers in ophthalmology2025
Eye-tracking biomarkers for glaucoma based on saccadic reaction time: a controlled clinical study.
Trial report in Frontiers in ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05449041 (Validation of Bulbicam for Use on Patient Suffering From Glaucoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Validation of Bulbicam for Use on Patient Suffering From Glaucoma (GLA) and Cataract (CAT)
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostics and rehabilitation of post-stroke visual field loss using innovative visual field evaluation. The impact of losing driving privileges (DRIVE-study): Protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2026Article
- Deep learning-based prediction of 24-2 visual field from fundus photographs in glaucoma.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Article
- Dynamic Pupillary Responses in Age-Related Macular Degeneration: A Controlled Clinical Study Using High-Frequency Video-Oculography.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
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: Evaluate the validity and reliability of saccadic reaction time (SRT)-based variables obtained using the novel eye-tracking device Bulbicam (BCAM) in differentiating early-to-moderate glaucoma (GLA) from healthy controls (HCs) and to identify potential biomarkers for GLA. Methods: A controlled clinical study was conducted, involving 18 GLA-patients, and 18 age-matched HCs. Participants underwent BCAM's visual field (VF) test, which measures SRT at 58 symmetrically arranged locations with 6° spacing. Variables were analysed for group differences, within- and between-patient repeatability, and stability. To evaluate their potential as biomarkers, VF locations were aggregated into clusters, quadrants, hemifields, and whole VF analyses. Results: Significant SRT differences (p ≤ 0.05) were observed between GLA and HC in 44 of 58 locations in the worst eye and 42 of 58 in the best eye. Eight out of ten clusters met the criteria for BCAM biomarkers having significant group differences, sufficient within- and between-patient repeatability, and adequate stability. All quadrants demonstrated excellent stability and repeatability thereby qualifying as biomarkers. Hemifield SRTs were reliable, however, the absolute difference between hemifields showed poor within-participant repeatability. The mean and standard deviation of SRT for the whole VF were identified as significant biomarkers with excellent stability. Conclusions: The majority of SRT variables are capable of differentiate glaucomatous eyes from HC while maintaining sufficient reliability and stability for clinical application. 19 of 22 BCAM VF test variables were found to be potential GLA-biomarkers. Clinical Trial Registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier NCT05449041.
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.