The learning effect in visual field testing of healthy subjects using frequency doubling technology

Journal of Glaucoma

Volumn 11, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 511-516

  Horani, Amjad ^a   Frenkel, Shahar ^a   Yahalom, Claudia ^a   Farber, Marilyn D ^a   Ticho, Uriel ^a   Blumenthal, Eytan Z ^a  

^a HADASSAH HEBREW UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

Author keywords

Frequency doubling technology; Glaucoma; Glaucoma diagnosis; Learning effect; Visual fields

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; FREQUENCY DOUBLING TECHNOLOGY PERIMETRY; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INSTRUMENT; LEARNING; MALE; MEASUREMENT; NORMAL HUMAN; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL FIELD;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; LEARNING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERIMETRY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 0036908627     PISSN: 10570829     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00061198-200212000-00011     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Vaughan D, Riordan-eva P. Glaucoma. In: Vaughan D, Asbury T, Riordan-eva P, eds. General Ophthalmology, 14th Ed. Lange; 1999:208-225.
2. Quigley HA. Number of people with glaucoma worldwide. Br J Ophthalmol 1996;80:389-393.
3. Spry P, Johnson CA. Assessing visual function in clinical practice. Ophthalmol Clin North Am 2000;13:361-382.
4. Quigley HA, Dunkelberger GR, Green WR. Chronic human glaucoma causing selectively greater loss of large optic nerve fibers. Ophthalmology 1988;95:357-363.
5. Quigley HA, Dunkelberger GR, Green WR. Retinal ganglion cell atrophy correlated with automated perimetry in human eyes with glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1989;107:453-464.
6. Quigley HA, Sanchez RM, Dunkelberger GR, et al. Chronic glaucoma selectively damages large optic nerve fibers. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1987;28:913-920.
7. Johnson CA. Samuels SJ. Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997;38:413-425.
8. Alward WL. Frequency doubling technology perimetry for the detection of glaucomatous visual field loss. Am J Ophthalmol 2000;129:376-378.
9. Kelly DH. Frequency doubling in visual responses. J Opt Soc Am 1966;56:1628-1633.
10. Kelly DH. Nonlinear visual responses to flickering sinusoidal gratings. J Opt Soc Am 1981;71:1051-1055.
11. Maddess T, Henry G. Performance of nonlinear visual units in ocular hypertension and glaucoma. Clin Vis Sci 1992;7:371-383.
12. Anderson AJ, Johnson CA. Mechanisms isolated by frequency-doubling technology perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:398-401.
13. Wood JM, Wild JM, Hussey MK, et al. Serial examination of the normal visual field using Octopus automated projection perimetry. Evidence for a learning effect. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1987;65:326-333.
14. Kulze JC, Stewart WC, Sutherland SE. Factors associated with a learning effect in glaucoma patients using automated perimetry. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1990;68:681-686.
15. Wild JM, Dengler-Harles M. Searle AE, et al. The influence of the learning effect on automated perimetry in patients with suspected glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1989;67:537-545.
16. Werner EB, Krupin T, Adelson A, et al. Effect of patient experience on the results of automated perimetry in glaucoma suspect patients. Ophthalmology 1990:97:44-48.
17. Quigley HA. Identification of glaucoma-related visual field abnormality with the screening protocol of frequency doubling technology. Am J Ophthalmol 1998;125:819-829.
18. Casson R, James B, Rubinstein A, et al. Clinical comparison of frequency doubling technology perimetry and Humphrey perimetry. Br J Ophthalmol 2001;85:360-362.
19. Burnstein Y, Ellish NJ, Magbalon M, et al. Comparison of frequency doubling perimetry with Humphrey visual field analysis in a glaucoma practice. Am J Ophthalmol 2000;129:328-333.
20. Iester M, Capris P, Pandolfo A. et al. Learning effect, short-term fluctuation, and long-term fluctuation in frequency doubling technique. Am J Ophthalmol 2000;130:160-164.
21. Fujimoto N, Minowa K, Miyauchi O, et al. Learning effect for frequency doubling perimetry in patients with glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 2002;133:269-270.
22. Ito A, Kawabata H, Fujimoto N, et al. Effect of myopia on frequency-doubling perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001;42:1107-1110.
23. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J. The effect of perimetric experience in normal subjects. Arch Ophthalmol 1989;107:81-86.
24. Wadood AC, Azuara-Blanco A, Aspinall P, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of frequency-doubling technology, tendency-oriented perimetry, and Humphrey Swedish interactive threshold algorithm-fast perimetry in a glaucoma practice. Am J Ophthalmol 2002;133:327-332.
25. Sample PA, Bosworth CF, Blumenthal EZ. et al. Visual function-specific perimetry for indirect comparison of different ganglion cell populations in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000;41:1783-1790.
26. Wild JM, Moss ID. Baseline alterations in blue-on-yellow normal perimetric sensitivity. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1996;234:141-149.
27. Heijl A, Bengtsson B. The effect of perimetric experience in patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1996;114:19-22.