Literature DB >> 2644927

A clinical study of perimetric probability maps.

A Heijl1, P Asman.   

Abstract

Perimetric probability maps depict visual field results in terms of the frequency with which the measured findings are seen in a normal population. We tested clinically the importance of the model of the normal visual field used to calculate such maps. Forty-one eyes of 41 normal subjects and 58 eyes of 46 glaucomatous patients were studied. Probability maps were calculated by means of two different models of the normal visual field. The first model assumed gaussian threshold distributions with constant variability across the field. The second used empirically determined nongaussian location-dependent threshold distributions. Probability maps using the empiric model allowed better separation between glaucomatous and normal eyes, and the number of significant points in normal subjects was in better agreement with the theoretically expected number. The gaussian model yielded an unacceptably high frequency of significant points in normal fields, particularly in the midperiphery. The clinical usefulness of perimetric probability maps depends critically on the choice of normal visual field model.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2644927     DOI: 10.1001/archopht.1989.01070010205023

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


  7 in total

1.  On weighted visual field indices.

Authors:  A Heijl; G Lindgren; J Olsson; P Asman
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Characteristics of the normative database for the Humphrey matrix perimeter.

Authors:  Andrew John Anderson; Chris A Johnson; Murray Fingeret; John L Keltner; Paul G D Spry; Michael Wall; John S Werner
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  A comparison of unweighted and fluctuation-weighted indices (within the central 28 degrees of glaucomatous visual fields measured with the Octopus automated perimeter).

Authors:  A T Funkhouser; F Fankhauser
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 2.031

4.  The effects of weighting the "mean defect" visual field index according to threshold variability in the central and midperipheral visual field.

Authors:  A Funkhouser; F Fankhauser
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Performance of two films for densitometry of retinal photographs.

Authors:  R Eikelboom; R Cooper; C Barry
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Normal visual fields measured with Octopus Program G1. I. Differential light sensitivity at individual test locations.

Authors:  M Zulauf
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 3.117

7.  Using Small Samples to Evaluate Normative Reference Ranges for Retinal Imaging Measures.

Authors:  William H Swanson; Brett J King; Douglas G Horner
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 1.973

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.