Learning effect, normal range, and test-retest variability of Frequency Doubling Perimetry as a function of age, perimetric experience, and the presence or absence of glaucoma

Ophthalmic and Physiological Optics

Volumn 23, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 535-540

  Heeg, Govert P ^a   Ponsioen, Theodorus L ^a   Jansonius, Nomdo M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Frequency Doubling Perimetry (FDT); Learning; Repeatability; Specificity

Indexed keywords

AGE; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; LEARNING; PARAMETER; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VISION; ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; LEARNING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERIMETRY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 1542544695     PISSN: 02755408     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1475-1313.2003.00149.x     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Abramson, J. H. and Gahlinger, P. M. (2001) Computer Programs for Epidemiologists: PEPI, Ver. 4.0. Sagebrush Press, Salt Lake City, UT.
2. Autzen, T. and Work, K. (1990) The effect of learning and age on short-term fluctuation and mean sensitivity of automated static perimetry. Acta Ophthalmol. (Copenh.) 68, 327-330.
3. Bland, J. M. and Altman, D. G. (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1, 307-310.
4. Chauhan, B. C. and Johnson, C. A. (1999) Test-retest variability of frequency-doubling perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal subjects. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 40, 648-656.
5. Fujimoto, N., Minowa, K., Miyauchi, O., Hanawa, T. and Adachi, U. (2002) Learning effect for frequency doubling perimetry in patients with glaucoma. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 133, 269-270.
6. Horani, A., Frenkel, S., Yahalom, C., Farber, M. D., Ticho, U. and Blumenthal, E. Z. (2002) The learning effect in visual field testing of healthy subjects using frequency doubling technology. J. Glaucoma 11, 511-516.
7. Iester, M., Capris, P., Pandolfo, A., Zingirian, M. and Traverse, C. E. (2000) Learning effect, short-term fluctuation, and long-term fluctuation in frequency doubling technique. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 130, 160-164.
8. Johnson, C. A. and Samuels, S. J. (1997) Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling perimetry. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 38, 413-425.
9. Joson, P. J., Kamantigue, M. E. and Chen, P. P. (2002) Learning effects among perimetric novices in frequency doubling technology perimetry. Ophthalmology 109, 757-760.
10. Katz J., Sommer A., Gaasterland D. E. and Anderson D. R. (1991): Comparison of analytic algorithms for detecting glaucomatous visual field loss. Arch. Ophthalmol. 109, 1684-1689.
11. Maddess, T. and Henry, G. H. (1992) Performance of a nonlinear pathway in subjects with ocular hypertension and glaucoma. Clin. Vis. Sci. 7, 371-382.
12. Maddess, T., Goldberg, I., Dobinson, J., Wine, S., Welsh, A. H. and James, A. C. (1999) Testing for glaucoma with the spatial frequency doubling illusion. Vision Res. 39, 4258-4273.
13. Matsuo, H., Tomita, G., Suzuki, Y. and Araie, M. (2002) Learning effect and measurement variability in frequency-doubling technology perimetry in chronic open-angle glaucoma. J. Glaucoma 11, 467-473.
14. Spry, P. G. D., Johnson, C. A., McKendrick, A. M. and Turpin, A. (2001) Variability components of standard automated perimetry and frequency-doubling technology perimetry. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 42, 1404-1410.
15. Werner, E. B., Adelson, A. and Krupin, T. (1988) Effect of patient experience on the results of automated perimetry in clinically stable glaucoma patients. Ophthalmology 95, 764-767.
16. Werner, E. B., Krupin, T., Adelson, A. and Feitl, M. E. (1990) Effect of patient experience on the results of automated perimetry in glaucoma suspect patients. Ophthalmology 97, 44-48.
17. Wild, J. M., Dengler, H., Searle, A. E., Neill, E. C. and Crews, S. J. (1989) The influence of the learning effect on automated perimetry in patients with suspected glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol. (Copenh.) 67, 537-545.