Learning effect, short-term fluctuation, and long-term fluctuation in frequency doubling technique

American Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 130, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 160-164

  Iester, Michele ^a,b   Capris, Paolo ^a   Pandolfo, Alessandra ^a   Zingirian, Mario ^a   Traverso, Carlo E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENOA   (Italy)

^b G GASLINI INSTITUTE   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; NORMAL HUMAN; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCREENING TEST; VIDEORECORDING; VISION TEST; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ADULT; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; MIDDLE AGE; PERIMETRY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 0033830436     PISSN: 00029394     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9394(00)00464-5     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Fankhauser F., Bebie H. Threshold fluctuations, interpolations and spatial resolution in perimetry. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser. 19:1979;295-309.
2. Flammer J., Drance S.M., Zulaf M. Differential light threshold short- and long-term fluctuation in patients with glaucoma, normal controls, and patients with suspected glaucoma . Arch Ophthalmol. 102:1984;704-706.
3. Bebie H., Fankhauser F., Spahr J. Static perimetry accuracy and fluctuations . Acta Ophthalmol. 54:1976;339-348.
4. Heijl A., Lindgren G., Olsson J. Normal variability of static perimetric threshold values across the central visual field. Arch Ophthalmol. 105:1987;1544-1549.
5. Wood J.M., Wild J.M., Hussey M.K., Crews S.J. Serial examination of the normal visual field using Octopus automated projection perimetry evidence for a learning effect . Acta Ophthalmol. 65:1987;326-333.
6. Heijl A., Bengtsson B. The effect of perimetric experience in patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 114:1996;19-22.
7. Pederson J.E., Anderson D.R. The mode of progressive disc cupping in ocular hypertension and glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 98:1980;490-495.
8. Quigley H.A., Addicks E.M., Green R. Optic nerve damage in human glaucoma, III quantitative correlation of nerve fiber loss and visual field defect in glaucoma, ischemic neuropathy, papilledema, and toxic neuropathy . Arch Ophthalmol. 100:1982;135-146.
9. Johnson C.A., Samuels S.J. Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 38:1997;413-425.
10. Chauhan B.C., Johnson C.A. Test-retest variability of frequency-doubling perimetry and conventional perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 40:1999;648-656.
11. Quigley H.A. Identification of glaucoma-related visual field abnormality with the screening protocol of frequency doubling technology. Am J Ophthalmol. 125:1998;819-829.
12. Johnson C.A., Demirel S. The role of spatial and temporal factors in frequency-doubling perimetry. Wall M., Heijl A. Perimetry update 1996/97 proceedings of the XII International Perimetric Society meeting . 1997;13-19 Kugler, New York.
13. Sponsel W.E., Arango S., Trigo Y., Mensah J. Clinical classification of glaucomatous visual field loss by frequency doubling perimetry. Am J Ophthalmol. 125:1998;830-836.
14. Iester M., Mermoud A., Schnyder C. Frequency doubling technique in subjects with ocular hypertension and glaucoma correlation with Octopus perimeter indices . Ophthalmology. 107:2000;288-294.
15. Heijl A., Lindgren G., Olsson J. A package for the statistical analysis of visual field. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser. 49:1987;153-168.
16. Zulauf M., Caprioli J., Hoffman D.C., Tressler C.S. Fluctuation of the differential light sensitivity in clinically stable glaucoma patients. Mills R.P., Heijl A. Perimetry update 1990/91 proceedings of the 9th International Perimetric Society meeting . 1991;183-188 Kugler, New York.
17. Drance S.M., Anderson D. Automatic perimetry in glaucoma a practical guide . 1984;164 Grune & Stratton, Orlando.
18. Werner E.B., Bishop K.I., Davis P., Krupin T., Petrig B., Sherman C. Visual field variability in stable glaucoma patients. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser. 49:1987;77-84.
19. Bengtsson B., Lindgren A., Heijl A., Lindgren G., Asman P., Patella M. Perimetric probability maps to separate change by glaucoma from that caused by cataract. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 75:1997;184-188.
20. Haas A., Flammer J., Schneider U. Influence of age on the visual fields of normal subjects. Am J Ophthalmol. 101:1986;199-203.
21. Katz J., Sommer A. A longitudinal study of age adjusted variability of automated visual field. Arch Ophthalmol. 105:1987;1083-1086.
22. Seamone C., Le Blanc R., Rubillowicz M., Mann C., Orr A. The value of indices in the central and peripheral visual fields for the detection of glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 106:1988;180-185.
23. Young W.O., Stewart W.C., Hunt H., Crosswell H. Static threshold variability in the peripheral visual field in normal subjects. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 228:1990;454-457.
24. Hoddapp E., Parrish R.K., Anderson D.R. Clinical decision in glaucoma. 1993;52-61 CV Mosby, St Louis, MO.
25. Marchini G., Pisano F., Bergtagnin F., Maraffa M., Bonomi L. Perimetric learning effects in glaucoma patients. Glaucoma. 13:1991;102-106.
26. Gramer E., De Natale R., Leydhecker W. Training effect and fluctuation in long-term follow-up of glaucomatous visual field defects calculated with program Delta of the Octopus-perimeter 201. New Trends Ophthalmol. 1:1986;219-228.
27. Werner E.B., Adelson A., Krupin T. Effect of patient experience on the results of automated perimetry in clinically stable glaucoma patients. Ophthalmology. 95:1988;764-767.