Literature DB >> 1526745

Properties of staircase procedures for estimating thresholds in automated perimetry.

C A Johnson1, B C Chauhan, L R Shapiro.   

Abstract

The properties of the staircase procedure as applied in automated perimetry were examined. Two computer simulation models were used to vary different test- and patient-related parameters in clinical perimetry. One model was based on the KRAKEN computer simulation program; the other computer simulation was based on stimulus-response data sets from 11 normal subjects. The results were analyzed in terms of efficiency and accuracy. It was found that: (1) in general, there was an efficiency-accuracy trade-off; (2) increases in response fluctuation produced substantially greater errors in threshold estimates; (3) little or no improvements in accuracy were achieved by increasing the number of reversals; (4) the starting position of the staircase relative to the threshold influenced the efficiency of threshold determinations but not their accuracy; (5) a single-response error reduced the efficiency of staircases; (6) the position of a single-response error in a staircase sequence influenced the accuracy and efficiency of the threshold determination; and (7) more than one response error during a staircase sequence always resulted in a marked reduction in accuracy and/or efficiency. Current perimetric strategies appear to be at or near optimal levels, and therefore, strategies in the future may need to depart from a staircase-style procedure to achieve a significant increase in both accuracy and efficiency. Computer simulation studies can provide an effective means of evaluating perimetric test procedures and defining optimum strategies, which then can be verified clinically by subsequent testing in patient populations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1526745

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci        ISSN: 0146-0404            Impact factor:   4.799


  15 in total

1.  Frequency of testing for detecting visual field progression.

Authors:  S K Gardiner; D P Crabb
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  Contrast sensitivity in pigeons: a comparison of behavioral and pattern ERG methods.

Authors:  William Hodos; Mimi M Ghim; Alex Potocki; Jessica N Fields; Thilo Storm
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  Measurement error of visual field tests in glaucoma.

Authors:  P G D Spry; C A Johnson; A M McKendrick; A Turpin
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Development and evaluation of a linear staircase strategy for the measurement of perimetric sensitivity.

Authors:  Rizwan Malik; William H Swanson; David F Garway-Heath
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2006-06-09       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Structural and functional correlation in sickle cell retinopathy using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography and scanning laser ophthalmoscope microperimetry.

Authors:  Clement C Chow; Mohamed A Genead; Anastasios Anastasakis; Felix Y Chau; Gerald A Fishman; Jennifer I Lim
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-07-02       Impact factor: 5.258

6.  Evaluation of FASTPAC: a new strategy for threshold estimation with the Humphrey Field Analyser.

Authors:  J G Flanagan; I D Moss; J M Wild; C Hudson; L Prokopich; D Whitaker; E C O'Neill
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  Optimal test parameters for computerized quantitative layer-by-layer perimetry.

Authors:  T Bek
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  Visual field test simulation and error in threshold estimation.

Authors:  S E Spenceley; D B Henson
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 4.638

9.  Optimizing the rapid measurement of detection thresholds in infants.

Authors:  Pete R Jones; Sarah Kalwarowsky; Oliver J Braddick; Janette Atkinson; Marko Nardini
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015-08-01       Impact factor: 2.240

10.  A novel Bayesian adaptive method for mapping the visual field.

Authors:  Pengjing Xu; Luis Andres Lesmes; Deyue Yu; Zhong-Lin Lu
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2019-12-02       Impact factor: 2.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.