About Visual Field Fast
Visual Field Fast (VFF) is an iPad application designed to help identify abnormalities in a person’s visual field.
It uses a dynamic, flickering noise pattern that may make areas of missing or reduced vision easier to perceive and outline.
Based on noise-field campimetry (snowfield perimetry), VFF is being studied as a rapid, portable complement to conventional visual field testing.
Clinical use:
VFF should be used under the supervision of an ophthalmologist, optometrist or trained ophthalmic technician.
It does not replace a comprehensive eye examination or standard automated perimetry.
How Does Visual Field Fast Work?
A Simple Explanation: Perceptual Filling-In
Each eye has a natural blind spot where the optic nerve exits the retina.
There are no photoreceptors at this location, yet we are usually unaware of the missing area.
The brain uses information from surrounding areas to perceptually bridge gaps in the visual image.
This is called perceptual filling-in.
Similar processes may make visual field defects caused by retinal, optic nerve or neurological disease less noticeable.
Making Missing Vision Easier to Notice
Dynamic, unpredictable visual patterns can interfere with filling-in.
Visual Field Fast displays a flickering noise field in which an affected area may appear darker, dimmer or less dynamic.
Users can outline the perceived abnormal area on the iPad.
The Science Behind the App
VFF builds on noise-field campimetry, also called snowfield perimetry.
Read about its history in
White Noise Field Campimetry
.
Related approaches have been investigated in
glaucoma,
neurological visual pathway disorders
and
retinal or macular disease.
The ideal stimulus characteristics may differ between conditions and remain an area of research.
Scientific Research and Clinical Validation
1. Glaucoma Validation — Eye (2022)
Ding J, Tecson IC, Ang BCH, Chiew W, Chua C, Yip LWL.
The performance of iPad-based noise-field perimeter versus Humphrey Field Analyser in detecting glaucomatous visual field loss.
Eye (Lond). 2022;36(4):800–811.
First published online 20 April 2021.
This peer-reviewed study compared VFF with Humphrey visual field testing in patients with glaucoma and normal controls.
Sensitivity
Specificity
Reported test–retest ICC
Reported testing duration was approximately
3.6 minutes for VFF
versus
6.9 minutes
for conventional perimetry in the study comparison.
These findings apply to the study population and testing conditions;
they should not be assumed to represent performance in every clinical or screening setting.
2. Neuro-Ophthalmology — NOSA (2023)
Lee HJ, Tien M, Ding J, Yip LWL.
Assessing the Utility of Novel iPad-Based Entopic Perimetry in the Detection of Neuro-Ophthalmic Conditions.
Neuro-Ophthalmology Society of Australia, 2023.
Conference abstract.
This presentation investigated the use of VFF in neuro-ophthalmological conditions, including
31 patients (47 eyes)
and
30 healthy controls (30 eyes).
3. Independent Neurological Study — ARVO (2025)
Lopes LT, Machado RM, de Britto GR, Carvalho PAS, Kasahara N.
Topographical equivalence of visual field defects as evaluated by the Visual Field Fast app and the Humphrey visual field in patients with neurological visual impairment.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science.
June 2025.
ARVO Annual Meeting abstract, Salt Lake City, 4–8 May 2025.
This independent cross-sectional study compared VFF with Humphrey SITA 24-2 testing in
62 patients
with neurological visual impairment.
VFF testing followed a 30-minute rest period.
Participants
Topographical agreement
Difference in reported test difficulty/preference
The authors described agreement as moderate.
The findings suggest potential use in neurological visual field assessment
but do not establish interchangeability with Humphrey perimetry.
Visual Field Fast in Scientific Reviews
4. iPad Visual Field Tests — Clinical Ophthalmology (2022)
Ichhpujani P, Dhillon H.
Spotlight on iPad Visual Field Tests Efficacy.
Clinical Ophthalmology.
2022;16:2179–2185.
This narrative review includes a dedicated discussion of Visual Field Fast,
its noise-field campimetry basis and the results of the original glaucoma validation study.
It summarises existing evidence rather than providing a new VFF clinical trial.
5. Home-Based Perimetry — Journal of Glaucoma (2022)
Daka Q, Mustafa R, Neziri B, Virgili G, Azuara-Blanco A.
Home-Based Perimetry for Glaucoma: Where Are We Now?
Journal of Glaucoma.
2022.
This systematic review provides broader context for home-based and portable glaucoma perimetry.
It is not a new clinical validation study of VFF.
6. Portable Perimetry Meta-Analysis — BMC Ophthalmology (2026)
Alajlan RS, Almazrou A, Althubiti L, Alsenani L,
Hazazi B, Alsarhan Y, Alharbi L, Alotaibi S.
Diagnostic accuracy and reliability of portable visual field-testing devices
for detecting manifest glaucomatous visual-field loss:
a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BMC Ophthalmology.
2026;26:466.
This review included 21 studies
of portable visual field-testing devices, including the original VFF study.
It summarised VFF’s previously reported sensitivity, specificity,
testing time and reliability.
Across tablet-based devices as a group,
pooled sensitivity was approximately 82%
and specificity 79%.
These pooled estimates combine different technologies and are
not VFF-specific results.
The review also discussed methodological limitations in the available
diagnostic accuracy studies, including patient-selection concerns,
and the need for prospective validation in representative populations.
Scientific Conference Presentations
In addition to the detailed studies above,
VFF-related research has been presented at international scientific meetings.
-
2025 — ARVO Annual Meeting:
Independent comparison of VFF and Humphrey perimetry
in neurological visual impairment
(62 participants; κ = 0.67).
Abstract. -
2023 — Neuro-Ophthalmology Society of Australia:
Investigation of iPad-based entopic perimetry
in neuro-ophthalmic conditions.
Programme. -
2021 — Asia-Pacific Glaucoma Congress:
Research on VFF and glaucomatous visual field loss. -
2020 — 14th European Glaucoma Society Congress:
Glaucoma validation research presented 12–13 December 2020.
Current Scientific Status
Clinical research has reported promising results for VFF in glaucoma
and has explored its use in neurological visual impairment.
Independent literature reviews and a systematic review
have placed the technology within the broader field of portable perimetry.
Further work is needed to establish performance in representative clinical populations,
reproducibility across settings, detection of visual field progression,
optimal stimulus settings and reliability of unsupervised testing.
Important:
VFF is a supplementary or investigational visual field assessment approach.
It is not a substitute for standard automated perimetry
or professional clinical evaluation.
Potential Applications
-
Glaucoma:
Rapid assessment of possible glaucomatous visual field abnormalities. -
Neuro-ophthalmology:
Investigation of visual field abnormalities affecting neurological visual pathways. -
Portable testing:
Visual field assessment using an iPad rather than a conventional perimeter. -
Clinical research:
Study of dynamic stimuli and perceptual filling-in. -
Future home-based assessment:
An area for further investigation, subject to appropriate validation and safeguards.
Scientific References
View Full Publication and Abstract References
-
Ding J, Tecson IC, Ang BCH, Chiew W, Chua C, Yip LWL.
The performance of iPad-based noise-field perimeter versus Humphrey Field Analyser
in detecting glaucomatous visual field loss.
Eye (Lond).
2022;36(4):800–811.
DOI: 10.1038/s41433-021-01541-x.
PMID: 33879855.
Publication. -
Lee HJ, Tien M, Ding J, Yip LWL.
Assessing the Utility of Novel iPad-Based Entopic Perimetry
in the Detection of Neuro-Ophthalmic Conditions.
NOSA Annual Scientific Meeting, 2023.
Conference abstract.
Programme. -
Lopes LT, Machado RM, de Britto GR, Carvalho PAS, Kasahara N.
Topographical equivalence of visual field defects as evaluated by the Visual Field Fast app
and the Humphrey visual field in patients with neurological visual impairment.
IOVS.
June 2025.
ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.
Abstract. -
Ichhpujani P, Dhillon H.
Spotlight on iPad Visual Field Tests Efficacy.
Clinical Ophthalmology.
2022;16:2179–2185.
DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S340508.
Publication. -
Daka Q, Mustafa R, Neziri B, Virgili G, Azuara-Blanco A.
Home-Based Perimetry for Glaucoma: Where Are We Now?
Journal of Glaucoma.
2022.
DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000002022.
Publication. -
Alajlan RS, Almazrou A, Althubiti L, Alsenani L,
Hazazi B, Alsarhan Y, Alharbi L, Alotaibi S.
Diagnostic accuracy and reliability of portable visual field-testing devices
for detecting manifest glaucomatous visual-field loss:
a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BMC Ophthalmology.
2026;26:466.
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-026-05092-1.
Publication.
Medical Disclaimer
Visual Field Fast supports research into alternative methods of visual field assessment.
It does not replace a comprehensive ophthalmic examination,
conventional automated perimetry or professional medical advice.
Results should be interpreted by qualified eye-care professionals
alongside other clinical findings.
Anyone experiencing new, sudden or progressive visual disturbance
should seek appropriate medical assessment.
Last updated: October 2026.