Manoj Pathak1, Shaban Demirel2, Stuart K Gardiner2. 1. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Murray State University, Murray, KY, USA. 2. Devers Eye Institute, Legacy Health, 1225 NE 2nd Ave, Portland, OR, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We have shown previously that a nonlinear exponential model fits longitudinal series of mean deviation (MD) better than a linear model. This study extends that work to investigate the mode (linear versus nonlinear) of change for pointwise sensitivities. METHODS: Data from 475 eyes of 244 clinically managed participants were analyzed. Sensitivity estimates at each test location were fitted using two-level linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. Sensitivity on the last test date was forecast using a model fit from the earlier test dates in the series. The means of the absolute prediction errors were compared to assess accuracy, and the root means square (RMS) of the prediction errors were compared to assess precision. RESULTS: Overall, the exponential model provided a significantly better fit (P < 0.05) to the data at the majority of test locations (69%). The exponential model fitted the data significantly better at 85% of locations in the upper hemifield and 58% of locations in the lower hemifield. The rate of visual field (VF) deterioration in the upper hemifield was more rapid (mean, -0.21 dB/y; range, -0.28 to -0.13) than in the lower hemifield (mean, -0.14 dB/y; range, -0.2 to -0.09). CONCLUSIONS: An exponential model may more accurately track pointwise VF change, at locations damaged by glaucoma. This was more noticeable in the upper hemifield where the VF changed more rapidly. However, linear and exponential models were similar in their ability to forecast future VF status. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: The VF progression appears to accelerate in early glaucoma patients.
PURPOSE: We have shown previously that a nonlinear exponential model fits longitudinal series of mean deviation (MD) better than a linear model. This study extends that work to investigate the mode (linear versus nonlinear) of change for pointwise sensitivities. METHODS: Data from 475 eyes of 244 clinically managed participants were analyzed. Sensitivity estimates at each test location were fitted using two-level linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. Sensitivity on the last test date was forecast using a model fit from the earlier test dates in the series. The means of the absolute prediction errors were compared to assess accuracy, and the root means square (RMS) of the prediction errors were compared to assess precision. RESULTS: Overall, the exponential model provided a significantly better fit (P < 0.05) to the data at the majority of test locations (69%). The exponential model fitted the data significantly better at 85% of locations in the upper hemifield and 58% of locations in the lower hemifield. The rate of visual field (VF) deterioration in the upper hemifield was more rapid (mean, -0.21 dB/y; range, -0.28 to -0.13) than in the lower hemifield (mean, -0.14 dB/y; range, -0.2 to -0.09). CONCLUSIONS: An exponential model may more accurately track pointwise VF change, at locations damaged by glaucoma. This was more noticeable in the upper hemifield where the VF changed more rapidly. However, linear and exponential models were similar in their ability to forecast future VF status. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: The VF progression appears to accelerate in early glaucoma patients.
Authors: Mae O Gordon; Julia A Beiser; James D Brandt; Dale K Heuer; Eve J Higginbotham; Chris A Johnson; John L Keltner; J Philip Miller; Richard K Parrish; M Roy Wilson; Michael A Kass Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2002-06
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
Authors: Siamak Yousefi; Tobias Elze; Louis R Pasquale; Osamah Saeedi; Mengyu Wang; Lucy Q Shen; Sarah R Wellik; Carlos G De Moraes; Jonathan S Myers; Michael V Boland Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Xiaoqin Huang; Jian Sun; Juleke Majoor; Koenraad Arndt Vermeer; Hans Lemij; Tobias Elze; Mengyu Wang; Michael Vincent Boland; Louis Robert Pasquale; Vahid Mohammadzadeh; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi; Chris Johnson; Siamak Yousefi Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Ricardo Y Abe; Alberto Diniz-Filho; Linda M Zangwill; Carolina P B Gracitelli; Amir H Marvasti; Robert N Weinreb; Saif Baig; Felipe A Medeiros Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 4.799