A comparison of the pattern-and total deviation-based glaucoma change probability programs

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 41, Issue 5, 2000, Pages 1012-1016

  Katz, Joanne ^a,b  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; SCREENING; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL FIELD DEFECT;

DISEASE PROGRESSION; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; PERIMETRY; PROBABILITY; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 0034106374     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Brigatti L, Nouri-Mahdavi K, Weitzman M, Caprioli J. Automatic-detection of glaucomatous visual field progression with neural networks. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115:725-728.
2. Werner EB, Bishop KI, Koelle J, et al. A comparison of experienced clinical observers and statistical tests in detection of progressive visual field loss in glaucoma using automated perimetry. Arch Ophthalmol. 1994;101:1445-1455.
3. Smith SD, Katz J. Quigley HA Analysis of progressive change in automated visual fields in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996;37:1419-1428.
4. Birch MK, Wishart PK. O'Donnel NP. Determining progressive visual field loss in serial Humphrey visual fields. Ophthalmology. 1995;102:1227-1235.
5. Chauhan BC, Drance SM, Douglas GR. The use of visual field indices in detecting changes in the visual field in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1990;31:512-520.
6. Noureddin BN, Poinoosawmy D, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Regression analysis of visual field progression in low tension glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1991;75:493-495.
7. Fitzke FW, McNaught AI. The diagnosis of visual field progression in glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 1994;5:110-115.
8. Wild JM, Hussey MK, Flanagan JG, Trope GE. Pointwise topographical and longitudinal modeling of the visual field in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:1907-1916.
9. Mandava S, Caprioli J, Zulauf M. Glaucoma Pattern Index to quantify glaucomatous visual field loss. J Glaucoma. 1992;1: 178-183.
10. Katz J, Gilbert D, Quigley HA, Sommer A. Estimating progression of visual field loss in glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1997;104:1017-1025.
11. Nouri-Mahdavi K, Brigatti L, Weitzman M, Caprioli J Comparison of methods to detect visual field progression in glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1997;104:1228-1236.
12. McNaught AI, Crabb DP, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Visual field progression comparison of Humphrey Statpac 2 and pointwise linear regression analysis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1996;234:411-418.
13. Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA, Poinoosawmy D, McNaught AI, Crabh DP. Analysis of visual field progression in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996;80:40-48.
14. Viswanathan AC, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Early detection of visual field progression in glaucoma: a comparison of PROGRESSOR and STATPAC 2. Br J Ophthalmol. 1997;81:1037-1042.
15. The Advanced Glaucoma Interventions Study Investigators Advanced Glaucoma Interventions Study (AGIS), 2: visual field test scoring and reliability. Ophthalmology. 1994;101:1445-1455.
16. The Advanced Glaucoma Interventions Study Investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Interventions Study (AGIS), 3: baseline characteristics of black and white patients. Ophthalmology. 1998;105: 1137-1145.
17. The Advanced Glaucoma Interventions Study Investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Interventions Study (AGIS), 4: comparison of treatment outcomes within race. Seven year results. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:1146-1164.
18. Katz J. Scoring systems for measuring progression of visual field loss in clinical trials of glaucoma treatment Ophthalmology. 1999; 106:391-395.
19. Katz J, Congdon N, Friedman DS. Methodological variations in estimating apparent progressive visual field loss in clinical trials of glaucoma treatment. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:1137-1142.
20. Heijl A Lindgren G, Olsson J, Åsman P. Visual field interpretation with empirical probability maps Arch Ophthalmol. 1989;107:204-208.
21. Smith SD, Katz J, Quigley HA. The effect of cataract extraction on the results of automated perimetry in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;1515-519.
22. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Lindgren A. et al. Extended empirical statistical package for evaluation of single and multiple fields in glaucoma: Statpac 2. Proceedings of the 9th International Petimetric Society Meeting. Malmö, Sweden. Amsterdam: Kugler; 1990;303-315.
23. Bengtsson B, Lindgren A, Heijl A, Lindgren G, Åsman P, Patella M. Perimetric probability maps to separate change caused by glaucoma from that caused by cataract. Acta Ophthalmol Scand, 1997; 75:184-188.
24. Sommer A, Quigley HA, Robin AL, et al. Evaluation of nerve fiber layer assessment. Arch Ophthalmol. 1984;102:1766-1771.
25. Sommer A, Katz J, Quigley HA, et al. Clinically detectable nerve fiber layer atrophy precedes the onset of glaucomatous visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol. 1991;109:77-83.
26. Katz J, Sommer A. Reliability indexes of automated perimetric tests. Arch Ophthalmol. 1988;106:1252-1254.
27. Hodapp E, Parrish RK II, Anderson DR. Clinical Decisions in Glaucoma. St. Louis: Mosby; 1993.