Evaluation of a Virtual Reality-Based Eye Tracker for Neuro-Ophthalmic Assessment: A Feasibility, Reliability and Reproducibility Study
Karaer, I.; Yoon, H.-J.; Ma, R.; Savant, R.; Rodwell, V.; Shenoy, R.; Tu, Z.; Arshad, Q.; Mukaetova-Ladinska, E. B.; Thomas, M. G.
Show abstract
Background/ObjectivesVirtual Reality (VR) eye trackers offer portable, objective tools for neuro-ophthalmic testing. This study evaluated the feasibility, reproducibility and reliability of a VR eye tracker (BulbiCAM) compared to wearable eye-tracking glasses (PupilLabs Neon glasses), highlighting its potential clinical utility and feasibility. Subjects/MethodsA prospective study involving 39 healthy participants (mean age{+/-}SD = 30.0 {+/-} 9.5 years) assessed inter-visit reproducibility of BulbiCAM tests across two visits. Pupillary light reflex tests were conducted with both BulbiCAM and PupilLabs Neon, enabling paired assessments. Reproducibility was analysed using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), reliability via Bland-Altman analysis, and participant experience through a survey evaluating test comfort and usability. ResultsParticipants feedback (n=27) highlighted high acceptability for BulbiCAM: 89% found the test comfortable, 92.6% felt the testing duration was appropriate, and 81.5% reported no eye strain or fatigue. Inter-visit reproducibility of Bulbicam tests showed high reproducibility for pursuit and pupil tests (ICC= 0.88-0.76), while saccadic tasks showed lower reproducibility (best ICC at 0.62). Paired assessments between devices showed close agreement for key pupillometer metrics: baseline diameter (bias: -0.48 {+/-} 0.47 mm), peak constriction diameter (bias: -0.56 {+/-} 0.36 mm), constriction velocity (bias: 0.22 {+/-} 0.58 mm/s), and duration of constriction (bias: -0.052 {+/-} 0.15 s). ConclusionsThis study highlights the clinical feasibility of BulbiCAM, with high patient acceptability and reproducibility for pursuit and pupil tests. Paired assessments confirmed its accuracy for key pupillometric parameters, validating its reliability for clinical and research use.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Quotidian Profile of Vergence Angle in Ambulatory Subjects Monitored with Wearable Eye Tracking Glasses 97%
- Automatic Measurements of Smooth Pursuit Eye Movements by Video-Oculography and Deep Learning-Based Object Detection 97%
- Two-Photon Microperimetry: A media opacity-independent retinal function assay 97%
Similar papers in this journal
- Automated 360-degree goniophotography with the NIDEK Gonioscope GS-1 for glaucoma 96%
- Reading; through the eyes of a university student: A double-masked randomised placebo-controlled cross-over protocol investigating coloured spectacle lens efficacy in adults with visual stress 96%
- The evaluation of a web‐based tool for measuring the uncorrected visual acuity and refractive error in keratoconus eyes: a prospective open‐label method comparison study 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Optic nerve tortuosity and displacements during horizontal eye movements in healthy and highly myopic subjects 95%
- Evaluation of the Nallasamy Formula: A Stacking Ensemble Machine Learning Method for Refraction Prediction in Cataract Surgery 95%
- AI-Powered Effective Lens Position Prediction Improves the Accuracy of Existing Lens Formulas 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Validity and Reliability of the CVI Range for Clinical Research (CVI Range-CR): Baseline and One-Year Results 94%
- Peripheral optical coherence tomography assisted by scleral depression in retinopathy of prematurity 94%
- Autonomous screening for Diabetic Macular Edema using deep learning processing of retinal images 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Automated vision screening of children using a mobile graphic device 97%
- Dense Optic Nerve Head Deformation Estimated using CNN as a Structural Biomarker of Glaucoma Progression 91%
- Evaluation of OCT biomarker changes in treatment-naive neovascular AMD using a deep semantic segmentation algorithm 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.