Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The authors examined 16 patients with stable homonymous visual field defects (HVFDs) with static automated perimetry (SAP). Training effect E was defined as difference of the proportions of absolutely defective locations in all test locations, before and after visual restitution training (VRT). E was 0.05 +/- 0.05 (mean +/- SD). The authors observed a relevant training effect (E >or= 0.12) in two subjects, but only monocularly. VRT has little effect on absolute HVFDs in SAP.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schreiber et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: