Measuring visual and quality of life outcomes in nystagmus: a scoping review.

IF 2.7 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Noah Clancy, James Self, Jane Vennik, Helena Lee
{"title":"Measuring visual and quality of life outcomes in nystagmus: a scoping review.","authors":"Noah Clancy, James Self, Jane Vennik, Helena Lee","doi":"10.1136/bmjophth-2026-002887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Pathological nystagmus of all aetiologies can cause visual disability and reduced quality of life. Recent research has characterised the dynamic nature of the condition and questioned the validity of widely used outcome measures, such as visual acuity (VA), as an accurate measure of visual function in nystagmus. VA only describes the spatial resolving capacity of the visual system for high contrast stimuli, whereas good visual function requires numerous components including contrast sensitivity, colour vision, depth perception and oculomotor functions. For these reasons, the literature on nystagmus, particularly interventional studies, has been inconsistent with regard to the outcome measures used.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a scoping literature review to characterise all published measures and instruments for determining functional vision and quality of life in patients with nystagmus.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 235 articles were included in the study, accounting for 5880 patients with nystagmus. Articles spanned six continents and eight decades of research. We identified 10 grouped outcome measures including VA (27 outcomes, 84 instruments), nystagmus features (33 outcomes, 4 instruments), visual function (11 outcomes, 30 instruments), ocular morphology (3 outcomes, 5 instruments), orthoptic and ocular alignment features (20 outcomes, 63 instruments), reading assessment (8 outcomes, 6 instruments), visual search assessment (4 outcomes, 4 instruments), foveation/function models (8 outcomes), patient-reported outcomes (30 outcomes) and non-ocular features (6 outcomes).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We have confirmed that there is significant heterogeneity in visual function and quality of life outcome measures in the nystagmus literature. It is evident that one or few measures are insufficient to measure all the relevant outcomes from interventional nystagmus studies. Therefore, we propose a Delphi project using our data to determine a standardised core outcome set for interventional nystagmus studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":9286,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Ophthalmology","volume":"11 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13629923/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjophth-2026-002887","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Pathological nystagmus of all aetiologies can cause visual disability and reduced quality of life. Recent research has characterised the dynamic nature of the condition and questioned the validity of widely used outcome measures, such as visual acuity (VA), as an accurate measure of visual function in nystagmus. VA only describes the spatial resolving capacity of the visual system for high contrast stimuli, whereas good visual function requires numerous components including contrast sensitivity, colour vision, depth perception and oculomotor functions. For these reasons, the literature on nystagmus, particularly interventional studies, has been inconsistent with regard to the outcome measures used.

Methods: We performed a scoping literature review to characterise all published measures and instruments for determining functional vision and quality of life in patients with nystagmus.

Results: A total of 235 articles were included in the study, accounting for 5880 patients with nystagmus. Articles spanned six continents and eight decades of research. We identified 10 grouped outcome measures including VA (27 outcomes, 84 instruments), nystagmus features (33 outcomes, 4 instruments), visual function (11 outcomes, 30 instruments), ocular morphology (3 outcomes, 5 instruments), orthoptic and ocular alignment features (20 outcomes, 63 instruments), reading assessment (8 outcomes, 6 instruments), visual search assessment (4 outcomes, 4 instruments), foveation/function models (8 outcomes), patient-reported outcomes (30 outcomes) and non-ocular features (6 outcomes).

Conclusion: We have confirmed that there is significant heterogeneity in visual function and quality of life outcome measures in the nystagmus literature. It is evident that one or few measures are insufficient to measure all the relevant outcomes from interventional nystagmus studies. Therefore, we propose a Delphi project using our data to determine a standardised core outcome set for interventional nystagmus studies.

眼球震颤的视觉和生活质量测量:范围综述。
导读:病理性眼球震颤可引起视力障碍,降低生活质量。最近的研究揭示了眼球震颤的动态特征,并对广泛使用的结果测量方法的有效性提出了质疑,例如视敏度(VA)作为眼球震颤视觉功能的准确测量方法。VA仅描述了视觉系统对高对比度刺激的空间分辨能力,而良好的视觉功能需要许多组成部分,包括对比度灵敏度、色觉、深度感知和动眼肌功能。由于这些原因,关于眼球震颤的文献,特别是干预性研究,在使用的结果测量方面一直不一致。方法:我们进行了一项范围广泛的文献综述,以描述所有已发表的用于确定眼球震颤患者功能视力和生活质量的测量和仪器。结果:本研究共纳入文献235篇,共纳入眼球震颤患者5880例。文章横跨六大洲,历时80年的研究。我们确定了10个分组结果测量,包括VA(27个结果,84个仪器)、眼球震颤特征(33个结果,4个仪器)、视觉功能(11个结果,30个仪器)、眼形态(3个结果,5个仪器)、正视和眼对准特征(20个结果,63个仪器)、阅读评估(8个结果,6个仪器)、视觉搜索评估(4个结果,4个仪器)、注视/功能模型(8个结果)、患者报告的结果(30个结果)和非眼特征(6个结果)。结论:我们已经证实,在眼球震颤文献中,视觉功能和生活质量结果测量存在显著的异质性。很明显,一种或几种测量方法不足以测量干预性眼球震颤研究的所有相关结果。因此,我们提出了一个德尔福项目,利用我们的数据来确定干预性眼球震颤研究的标准化核心结果集。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMJ Open Ophthalmology
BMJ Open Ophthalmology OPHTHALMOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
104
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书