133
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original article

Agreement Between Virtual Reality Perimetry and Static Automated Perimetry in Various Neuro-Ophthalmological Conditions: A Pilot Study

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 255-261 | Received 14 Dec 2022, Accepted 22 Aug 2023, Published online: 16 Oct 2023

References

  • Kedar S, Ghate D, Corbett JJ. Visual fields in neuro-ophthalmology. Indian J Ophthalmol. 2011;59(2):103–109. doi:10.4103/0301-4738.77013.
  • Hepworth LR, Rowe FJ. Programme choice for perimetry in neurological conditions (PoPin): a systematic review of perimetry options and patterns of visual field loss. BMC Ophthalmol. 2018;18(1):241. doi:10.1186/s12886-018-0912-1.
  • Wong SH, Plant GT. How to interpret visual fields. Pract Neurol. 2015;15(5):374–381. doi:10.1136/practneurol-2015-001155. Epub July 3, 2015.
  • Khoury JM, Donahue SP, Lavin PJ, Tsai JC. Comparison of 24-2 and 30-2 perimetry in glaucomatous and nonglaucomatous optic neuropathies. J Neuroophthalmol. 1999;19(2):100–108. doi:10.1097/00041327-199906000-00004. PMID: 10380130.
  • Szatmáry G, Biousse V, Newman NJ. Can Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm fast perimetry be used as an alternative to Goldmann perimetry in neuro-ophthalmic practice? Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(9):1162–1173. doi:10.1001/archopht.120.9.1162. PMID: 12215089.
  • Tsapakis S, Papaconstantinou D, Diagourtas A, Droutsas K, Andreanos K, Moschos MM, et al. Visual field examination method using virtual reality glasses compared with the Humphrey perimeter. Clin Ophthalmol. 2017;11:1431–1443. doi:10.2147/OPTH.S131160. PMID: 28848325.
  • Johnson CA, Thapa S, George Kong YX, Robin AL. Performance of an iPad application to detect moderate and advanced visual field loss in Nepal. Am J Ophthalmol. 2017;182:147–154. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2017.08.007. PMID: 28844641.
  • Vingrys AJ, Healey JK, Liew S, Saharinen V, Tran M, Wu W, et al. Validation of a tablet as a tangent perimeter. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2016;5(4):3. doi:10.1167/tvst.5.4.3. PMID: 27486553.
  • Mees L, Upadhyaya S, Kumar P, Kotawala S, Haran S, Rajasekar S. Validation of a head-mounted virtual reality visual field screening device. J Glaucoma. 2020;29(2):86–91. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000001415.
  • Matsumoto C, Yamao S, Nomoto H, et al. Visual field testing with head-mounted perimeter ‘imo’. PLoS One. 2016;11(8):e0161974. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0161974. PMID: 27564382.
  • McHugh ML. Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2012;22(3):276–282. doi:10.11613/BM.2012.031. PMID: 23092060.
  • Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20(1):37–46. doi:10.1177/001316446002000104.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.