Literature DB >> 23833069

Nonlinear, multilevel mixed-effects approach for modeling longitudinal standard automated perimetry data in glaucoma.

Manoj Pathak1, Shaban Demirel, Stuart K Gardiner.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Ordinary least squares linear regression (OLSLR) analyses are inappropriate for performing trend analysis on repeatedly measured longitudinal data. This study examines multilevel linear mixed-effects (LME) and nonlinear mixed-effects (NLME) methods to model longitudinally collected perimetry data and determines whether NLME methods provide significant improvements over LME methods and OLSLR.
METHODS: Models of LME and NLME (exponential, whereby the rate of change in sensitivity worsens over time) were examined with two levels of nesting (subject and eye within subject) to predict the mean deviation. Models were compared using analysis of variance or Akaike's information criterion and Bayesian information criterion, as appropriate.
RESULTS: Nonlinear (exponential) models provided significantly better fits than linear models (P < 0.0001). Nonlinear fits markedly improved the validity of the model, as evidenced by the lack of significant autocorrelation, residuals that are closer to being normally distributed, and improved homogeneity. From the fitted exponential model, the rate of glaucomatous progression for an average subject of age 70 years was -0.07 decibels (dB) per year. Ten years later, the same eye would be deteriorating at -0.12 dB/y.
CONCLUSIONS: Multilevel mixed-effects models provide better fits to the test data than OLSLR by accounting for group effects and/or within-group correlation. However, the fitted LME model poorly tracks visual field (VF) change over time. An exponential model provides a significant improvement over linear models and more accurately tracks VF change over time in this cohort.

Entities:  

Keywords:  autocorrelation; glaucoma; linear mixed effect; mean deviation; nonlinear mixed effect

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23833069      PMCID: PMC3747790          DOI: 10.1167/iovs.13-12236

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


  36 in total

1.  Examination of different pointwise linear regression methods for determining visual field progression.

Authors:  Stuart K Gardiner; David P Crabb
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.799

2.  Optic disc and visual field progression in ocular hypertensive subjects: detection rates, specificity, and agreement.

Authors:  Nicholas G Strouthidis; Andrew Scott; Neena M Peter; David F Garway-Heath
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  Psychophysical investigation of ganglion cell loss in early glaucoma.

Authors:  Paul G D Spry; Chris A Johnson; Steven L Mansberger; George A Cioffi
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Linking structure and function in glaucoma.

Authors:  R S Harwerth; J L Wheat; M J Fredette; D R Anderson
Journal:  Prog Retin Eye Res       Date:  2010-03-11       Impact factor: 21.198

5.  Visual field staging systems in glaucoma and the activities of daily living.

Authors:  Kaushal M Kulkarni; Jason R Mayer; Luciano L Lorenzana; Jonathan S Myers; George L Spaeth
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-05-24       Impact factor: 5.258

6.  Type 2 diabetes mellitus and the risk of open-angle glaucoma the Los Angeles Latino Eye Study.

Authors:  Vikas Chopra; Rohit Varma; Brian A Francis; Joanne Wu; Mina Torres; Stanley P Azen
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2007-08-22       Impact factor: 12.079

7.  Rate of visual field progression in eyes with optic disc hemorrhages in the ocular hypertension treatment study.

Authors:  Carlos Gustavo De Moraes; Shaban Demirel; Stuart K Gardiner; Jeffrey M Liebmann; George A Cioffi; Robert Ritch; Mae O Gordon; Michael A Kass
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-12

8.  Is there evidence for continued learning over multiple years in perimetry?

Authors:  Stuart K Gardiner; Shaban Demirel; Chris A Johnson
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 1.973

9.  The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020.

Authors:  H A Quigley; A T Broman
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.638

10.  Natural history of open-angle glaucoma.

Authors:  Anders Heijl; Boel Bengtsson; Leslie Hyman; M Cristina Leske
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2009-10-24       Impact factor: 12.079

View more
  23 in total

1.  Evaluation of Visual Field and Imaging Outcomes for Glaucoma Clinical Trials (An American Ophthalomological Society Thesis).

Authors:  David F Garway-Heath; Ana Quartilho; Philip Prah; David P Crabb; Qian Cheng; Haogang Zhu
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2017-08-22

2.  What rates of glaucoma progression are clinically significant?

Authors:  Luke J Saunders; Felipe A Medeiros; Robert N Weinreb; Linda M Zangwill
Journal:  Expert Rev Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-05-13

3.  Localized Changes in Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness as a Predictor of Localized Functional Change in Glaucoma.

Authors:  Stuart K Gardiner; Brad Fortune; Shaban Demirel
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 5.258

4.  Reducing variability in visual field assessment for glaucoma through filtering that combines structural and functional information.

Authors:  Lisha Deng; Shaban Demirel; Stuart K Gardiner
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2014-06-26       Impact factor: 4.799

Review 5.  Functional assessment of glaucoma: Uncovering progression.

Authors:  Rongrong Hu; Lyne Racette; Kelly S Chen; Chris A Johnson
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-04-26       Impact factor: 6.048

6.  Differences in the Relation Between Perimetric Sensitivity and Variability Between Locations Across the Visual Field.

Authors:  Stuart K Gardiner
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2018-07-02       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  A CNN-aided method to predict glaucoma progression using DARC (Detection of Apoptosing Retinal Cells).

Authors:  Eduardo M Normando; Tim E Yap; John Maddison; Serge Miodragovic; Paolo Bonetti; Melanie Almonte; Nada G Mohammad; Sally Ameen; Laura Crawley; Faisal Ahmed; Philip A Bloom; Maria Francesca Cordeiro
Journal:  Expert Rev Mol Diagn       Date:  2020-05-03       Impact factor: 5.225

8.  One Year of Glaucoma Research in Review: 2012 to 2013.

Authors:  Charles Kim; Anna M Demetriades; Nathan M Radcliffe
Journal:  Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila)       Date:  2014 Jan-Feb

9.  Comparison of Short- And Long-Term Variability in Standard Perimetry and Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography in Glaucoma.

Authors:  Carla N Urata; Eduardo B Mariottoni; Alessandro A Jammal; Nara G Ogata; Atalie C Thompson; Samuel I Berchuck; Tais Estrela; Felipe A Medeiros
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-11-09       Impact factor: 5.258

10.  Structural Measurements for Monitoring Change in Glaucoma: Comparing Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness With Minimum Rim Width and Area.

Authors:  Stuart K Gardiner; Pui Yi Boey; Hongli Yang; Brad Fortune; Claude F Burgoyne; Shaban Demirel
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 4.799

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.