| Literature DB >> 33244442 |
Bettina Teng1, Dian Li1,2, Eun Young Choi1, Lucy Q Shen3, Louis R Pasquale4,5, Michael V Boland6, Pradeep Ramulu7, Sarah R Wellik8, Carlos Gustavo De Moraes9, Jonathan S Myers10, Siamak Yousefi11, Thao Nguyen12, Yuying Fan1, Hui Wang1,13, Peter J Bex14, Tobias Elze1,15, Mengyu Wang1.
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate intereye associations of visual field (VF) defects.Entities:
Keywords: archetypal analysis; inter-eye correlation; visual field
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33244442 PMCID: PMC7683854 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.9.12.22
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol ISSN: 2164-2591 Impact factor: 3.048
Figure 1.(A) An illustration of the 16 archetype (AT) patterns and corresponding nomenclature derived by artificial intelligence and clinically validated in our prior work., (B) An example of the AT decomposition method using the total deviation (TD) plot. The plotting range is set from −38 dB to +38 dB to ensure that on the color scale white represents normal visual field sensitivities with 0 dB.
Figure 2.Distribution of mean deviation (MD) values for the better (A) and worse (B) eyes. Pearson correlation coefficient of MD values between the better and worse eyes is shown in the legend. (C) Distribution of MD difference (better minus worse eyes). (D) Pearson correlation coefficients of total deviation (TD) values between the better and worse eyes at each of the 52 test locations on the 24-2 visual field. Darker red means stronger correlation.
Figure 3.Pearson correlation coefficients between the 15 decomposed archetypes (ATs) representing defect patterns in the better (vertical axis) and worse (horizontal axis) eyes. Darker red means stronger correlation. Correlation was marked as nonsignificant (ns) on the heatmap if the corresponding P value ≥ 0.05. P values were corrected for multiple comparisons.
Figure 4.The best models selected by stepwise logistic regression to calculate the probability of the presence of archetypes (AT) 2 through 16. (A) AUCs with their mean values. (B, C) Logistic regression coefficients to predict the presence (>10%) of AT 14 (B) and AT 16 (C) in the better eye using the AT coefficients of the worse eye. The numbers noted on top of the bars represent the respective statistical significance of each parameter, which were measured by the magnitude of BIC increase when a parameter was removed from the optimal model. When the BIC increase for a parameter is at least 6 higher than another parameter in the model, the former parameter is considered strongly more associated with the outcome than the latter parameter.
Figure 5.Three consecutive visual fields (VFs) of two patients, measured 6 months apart, in which the defect in the better eye (blue box) disappears in the second test (middle column) and reappears in the third test (right column). (A) Patient 1 has archetype 14 as the dominant VF defect; (B) Patient 2 has archetype 16 as the dominant VF defect. Our model estimates the presence of archetypes 14 and 16 (>10%) in the better eye with high probabilities at all three time points.