Literature DB >> 26257997

Comparison of Three Parametric Models for Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression Rate Distributions.

Andrew J Anderson1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare parametric models for fitting published distributions of visual field progression rates (in dB/yr) for glaucoma.
METHOD: We fitted a modified Gaussian model, a modified Cauchy model and a modified hyperbolic secant model to previously published distributions of visual field progression rates from Canada, Sweden, and the United States. The modification allowed the shape of the model's distribution either side of the mode to be independently varied to allow for the asymmetric tails seen in visual field progression rate distributions.
RESULTS: Summing likelihoods across datasets, the modified hyperbolic secant was strongly favored (by 26.7 log units) compared with the next best-fitting model, the modified Cauchy. The modified hyperbolic secant was not the best fit for the Canadian dataset, however. Best-fitting modified hyperbolic secant parameters were broadly similarly between datasets, with parameter variances being less than those expected to negate the benefits of a previously described Bayesian method for improving individual visual field progression rate estimates in glaucoma.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the optimum model differed depending upon the particular dataset, a modified hyperbolic secant performed well for all distributions investigated and was strongly favored when evidence was summed across datasets. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: Despite differences in the progression rate distributions between studies, the use of an "average" distribution may still be of benefit for improving individual visual field progression rate estimates in glaucoma using Bayesian methods.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian; distribution; glaucoma; progression rate; visual field

Year:  2015        PMID: 26257997      PMCID: PMC4525796          DOI: 10.1167/tvst.4.4.2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol        ISSN: 2164-2591            Impact factor:   3.283


  16 in total

1.  A new look at threshold estimation algorithms for automated static perimetry.

Authors:  A J Vingrys; M J Pianta
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 1.973

2.  On the accuracy of measuring rates of visual field change in glaucoma.

Authors:  N M Jansonius
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 4.638

3.  Improved prediction of rates of visual field loss in glaucoma using empirical Bayes estimates of slopes of change.

Authors:  Felipe A Medeiros; Linda M Zangwill; Robert N Weinreb
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 2.503

4.  Efficient and unbiased modifications of the QUEST threshold method: theory, simulations, experimental evaluation and practical implementation.

Authors:  P E King-Smith; S S Grigsby; A J Vingrys; S C Benes; A Supowit
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Risk factors for visual field progression in treated glaucoma.

Authors:  Carlos Gustavo V De Moraes; Viral J Juthani; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Christopher C Teng; Celso Tello; Remo Susanna; Robert Ritch
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-05

6.  Combining structural and functional measurements to improve detection of glaucoma progression using Bayesian hierarchical models.

Authors:  Felipe A Medeiros; Mauro T Leite; Linda M Zangwill; Robert N Weinreb
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma.

Authors:  Paul H Artes; Donna M Hutchison; Marcelo T Nicolela; Raymond P LeBlanc; Balwantray C Chauhan
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 4.799

8.  Canadian Glaucoma Study: 3. Impact of risk factors and intraocular pressure reduction on the rates of visual field change.

Authors:  Balwantray C Chauhan; Frederick S Mikelberg; Paul H Artes; A Gordon Balazsi; Raymond P LeBlanc; Mark R Lesk; Marcelo T Nicolela; Graham E Trope
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-08-09

9.  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

10.  Rates of glaucomatous visual field change in a large clinical population.

Authors:  Balwantray C Chauhan; Rizwan Malik; Lesya M Shuba; Paul E Rafuse; Marcelo T Nicolela; Paul H Artes
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 4.799

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Disc Hemorrhages Are Associated With the Presence and Progression of Glaucomatous Central Visual Field Defects.

Authors:  Aakriti G Shukla; Portia E Sirinek; C Gustavo De Moraes; Dana M Blumberg; George A Cioffi; Alon Skaat; Christopher A Girkin; Robert N Weinreb; Linda M Zangwill; Donald C Hood; Jeffrey M Liebmann
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2020-06       Impact factor: 2.503

3.  Significant Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression in the First Two Years: What Does It Mean?

Authors:  Andrew J Anderson
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2016-11-01       Impact factor: 3.283

4.  Forecasting future Humphrey Visual Fields using deep learning.

Authors:  Joanne C Wen; Cecilia S Lee; Pearse A Keane; Sa Xiao; Ariel S Rokem; Philip P Chen; Yue Wu; Aaron Y Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.