Skip to main content
. 2025 Jan 10;20(1):e0315712. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315712

Table 2. Infrared video pupillometry vs. ultrasound pupillometry in ON+ and HC eyes.

ON+ eyes
(n = 52, 40 individuals)
HC eyes
(n = 100, 50 individuals)
Method IVP (n = 52) UP (n = 52) IVP-UP (n = 52) IVP (n = 98) UP (n = 100) IVP-UP (n = 98)
PD at rest, mm, mean (SD) 5.23 (1.11) 4.80 (0.78) 0.44 (0.87) 5.55 (1.05) 4.86 (0.85) 0.69 (0.80)
Correlation of IVP and UPA, r (95% CI), p 0.56 (0.35; 0.72)
p = 0.001
0.60 (0.47; 0.72)
p = 0.001
PD after direct Lstim, mm, mean (SD) 3.33 (0.70) 3.03 (0.70) 0.30 (0.59) 3.27 (0.67) 3.01 (0.65) 0.26 (0.52)
Correlation of IVP and UPA, r (95% CI), p 0.64 (0.47; 0.77)
p = 0.001
0.63 (0.50; 0.74)
p = 0.001
Constriction range, %, mean (SD) 36.0 (6.1) 36.9 (10.4) -0.9 (9.4) 41.2 (4.0) 38.0 (6.9) 3.2 (6.4)
CorrelationA of IVP and UP, r (95% CI), p 0.49 (0.27; 0.66)
p = 0.001
0.34 (0.13; 0.52)
p = 0.001

CorrelationA = correlation coefficient calculated from marginal r2 values of linear mixed models accounting for repeated measures, HC = healthy controls, IVP = infrared video pupillometry, Lstim = light stimulus, mm = millimeters, ON+ eyes = eyes with optic neuritis, PD = pupil diameter, SD = standard deviation, UP = ultrasound pupillometry, 95% CI = 95% confidence interval.