Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWall, M
dc.contributor.authorZamba, GKD
dc.contributor.authorArtes, Paul
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-16T17:45:45Z
dc.date.available2018-02-16T17:45:45Z
dc.date.issued2018-01-22
dc.identifier.issn1552-5783
dc.identifier.issn1552-5783
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/10808
dc.description.abstract

PURPOSE: It has been shown that threshold estimates below approximately 20 dB have little effect on the ability to detect visual field progression in glaucoma. We aimed to compare stimulus size V to stimulus size III, in areas of visual damage, to confirm these findings by using (1) a different dataset, (2) different techniques of progression analysis, and (3) an analysis to evaluate the effect of censoring on mean deviation (MD). METHODS: In the Iowa Variability in Perimetry Study, 120 glaucoma subjects were tested every 6 months for 4 years with size III SITA Standard and size V Full Threshold. Progression was determined with three complementary techniques: pointwise linear regression (PLR), permutation of PLR, and linear regression of the MD index. All analyses were repeated on "censored'' datasets in which threshold estimates below a given criterion value were set to equal the criterion value. RESULTS: Our analyses confirmed previous observations that threshold estimates below 20 dB contribute much less to visual field progression than estimates above this range. These findings were broadly similar with stimulus sizes III and V. CONCLUSIONS: Censoring of threshold values < 20 dB has relatively little impact on the rates of visual field progression in patients with mild to moderate glaucoma. Size V, which has lower retest variability, performs at least as well as size III for longitudinal glaucoma progression analysis and appears to have a larger useful dynamic range owing to the upper sensitivity limit being higher.

dc.format.extent439-439
dc.format.mediumPrint
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherAssociation for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO)
dc.subjectautomated perimetry
dc.subjectvisual field
dc.subjectglaucoma
dc.titleThe Effective Dynamic Ranges for Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression With Standard Automated Perimetry and Stimulus Sizes III and V
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.typeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
dc.typeResearch Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000425855900054&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=11bb513d99f797142bcfeffcc58ea008
plymouth.issue1
plymouth.volume59
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalInvestigative Opthalmology &amp; Visual Science
dc.identifier.doi10.1167/iovs.17-22390
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/School of Health Professions
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA03 Allied Health Professions, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Health and Community
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.publisher.placeUnited States
dc.identifier.eissn1552-5783
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1167/iovs.17-22390
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV