Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41838375›Full record

ArticleOphthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists)2026

Devising and Evaluating an Adaptive Static-Automated Perimetry Test for Children: A Feasibility Study.

Andrew Turpin, Vanessa Ts Tang, Siavash Salmanzadeh, Elisse Higginbotham, Allison M McKendrick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists), 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

5 authors.

Andrew TurpinLions Eye Institute, Perth, Australia. andrew.turpin@curtin.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2559-8769
Vanessa Ts TangLions Eye Institute, Perth, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9656-1392
Siavash SalmanzadehLions Eye Institute, Perth, Australia.
Elisse HigginbothamDepartment of Optometry & Vision Science, School of Health and Clinical Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-2370-1741
Allison M McKendrickLions Eye Institute, Perth, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1972-1222

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess the feasibility of a Static Automated Perimetry in children test (cSAP) designed to return clinically useful information about a visual field when stopped after any number of presentations while testing the visual fields of children.

methodThe cSAP test was engineered with specific location selection, test logic and data presentation as the core of the perimetric procedure. Some strategies were added to engage children in the test such as fixation markers that changed shape and colour, splitting the test into 'levels' and a small visual and audio reward at the end of each level. The method was run dichoptically on the Topcon Tempo Perimeter using the Open Perimetry Interface. This is a report of a validation study on 10 adults with visual field loss, looking at the differences between the final estimated field and the fields reported after each presentation, as well as comparing to a simulated baseline procedure with the same test logic but random location selection. Additionally, the experience of using the method to test 11 children aged 4-9 years is also reported, with six being retested 3 months later.

resultsStopping cSAP after any number of presentations always gave a better estimate of the final field than the baseline method in the adult eyes, although four of the 10 differences were small. The youngest child, 4 years of age, had difficulty focussing on the test to get a useful field, but generally all other children engaged in the task and returned a sensible visual field result. There was an obvious learning effect across the re-tested younger children.

conclusioncSAP is a feasible method for testing children or others who may not complete a standard visual field test, with design advantages over conventional SAP tests for this purpose.

Indexed as

Visual FieldsVisual Field TestsAdultChildChild, PreschoolFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsPaediatric ophthalmologyPerimetry algorithmVisual function

Identifiers

PMID41838375
PMCPMC13369772

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.