ReviewJournal of eye movement research2026
Virtual Reality Orthoptic Interventions for Binocular Vision Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Journal of eye movement research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeTo systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating digital orthoptic interventions, including virtual reality (VR)-based approaches, for convergence insufficiency and intermittent exotropia.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines and AMSTAR-2 standards and was prospectively registered in PROSPERO. PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched up to December 2025. Eligible studies were RCTs comparing VR-based or digital orthoptic interventions with conventional therapy, placebo VR, or control conditions. Primary outcomes included near point of convergence, ocular deviation, fusional reserves, and stereopsis. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and certainty of evidence with GRADE.
resultsFour RCTs (184 participants) were included. In convergence insufficiency, digital orthoptic interventions, including VR-based approaches, significantly reduced near heterophoria (mean difference [MD] -1.64 prism diopters; 95% CI -3.17 to -0.12), with no significant effects on near point of convergence or positive fusional reserves. In intermittent exotropia, VR-based interventions significantly improved near point of convergence (MD -1.60 cm; 95% CI -2.64 to -0.55), although this change did not reach the ≥4 cm threshold considered clinically meaningful according to the Convergence Insufficiency Treatment Trial. Improvements were also observed in stereopsis (MD -0.19 log units; 95% CI -0.33 to -0.04), while changes in near deviation were not significant. Evidence certainty ranged from low to moderate.
conclusionsVR-based and digital orthoptic interventions may offer modest, outcome-specific benefits as adjunctive treatments for selected binocular vision disorders. Larger, well-designed RCTs with standardized outcomes are needed.
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.