Literature DB >> 1841577

Statpac 2 glaucoma change probability.

R K Morgan1, W J Feuer, D R Anderson.   

Abstract

We compared the traditional intuitive criterion (fixed at 5 dB) with the variable Statpac 2 criterion of the Humphrey Field Analyzer for identifying visual deterioration at individual points within a visual field. The separation of depressed from stable points in 123 follow-up fields of 17 patients, when all points within a field were considered, was reasonably equivalent between the two methods (kappa = 0.55 +/- 0.027 [+/- SE]). Centrally located points within the field demonstrated a stronger agreement (kappa = 0.68 +/- 0.028), because the fixed criterion more often labeled the edge points as having progressed than did the Statpac 2 algorithm. The glaucoma change probability printout is more simply obtained than the manual comparison required for intuitive interpretation with a fixed criterion, and it is potentially more accurate because of its reliance on a database that permits a variable criterion to be applied.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1841577     DOI: 10.1001/archopht.1991.01080120074029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0003-9950


  8 in total

1.  Visual field progression: comparison of Humphrey Statpac2 and pointwise linear regression analysis.

Authors:  A I McNaught; D P Crabb; F W Fitzke; R A Hitchings
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Integrating event- and trend-based analyses to improve detection of glaucomatous visual field progression.

Authors:  Felipe A Medeiros; Robert N Weinreb; Grant Moore; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Christopher A Girkin; Linda M Zangwill
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2012-01-21       Impact factor: 12.079

3.  Psychophysical testing in glaucoma.

Authors:  K Hitchings
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Optical coherence tomography longitudinal evaluation of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in glaucoma.

Authors:  Gadi Wollstein; Joel S Schuman; Lori L Price; Ali Aydin; Paul C Stark; Ellen Hertzmark; Edward Lai; Hiroshi Ishikawa; Cynthia Mattox; James G Fujimoto; Lelia A Paunescu
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-04

5.  Longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses of visual field progression in participants of the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study.

Authors:  Paul H Artes; Balwantray C Chauhan; John L Keltner; Kim E Cello; Chris A Johnson; Douglas R Anderson; Mae O Gordon; Michael A Kass
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-12

6.  Analysis of visual field progression in glaucoma.

Authors:  F W Fitzke; R A Hitchings; D Poinoosawmy; A I McNaught; D P Crabb
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 4.638

7.  Comparison of Methods to Detect and Measure Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression.

Authors:  Alessandro Rabiolo; Esteban Morales; Lilian Mohamed; Vicente Capistrano; Ji Hyun Kim; Abdelmonem Afifi; Fei Yu; Anne L Coleman; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi; Joseph Caprioli
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 3.283

8.  Designs and Methodologies Used in Landmark Clinical Trials of Glaucoma: Implications for Future Big Data Mining and Actionable Disease Treatment.

Authors:  Saif Aldeen AlRyalat; Monica K Ertel; Leonard K Seibold; Malik Y Kahook
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-01-26
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.