A Comparison of Visual Field Progression Criteria of 3 Major Glaucoma Trials in Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial Patients

Ophthalmology

Volumn 115, Issue 9, 2008, Pages 1557-1565

  Heijl, Anders ^a   Bengtsson, Boel ^a   Chauhan, Balwantray C ^b   Lieberman, Marc F ^c   Cunliffe, Ian ^d   Hyman, Leslie ^e   Leske, M Cristina ^e  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c Glaucoma Consultants of the Bay Area   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS BIRMINGHAM NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^e STONY BROOK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE COURSE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VISION TEST; VISUAL FIELD;

AGED; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA, OPEN-ANGLE; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OPTIC NERVE DISEASES; PERIMETRY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TIME FACTORS; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 50249116150     PISSN: 01616420     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.02.005     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Leske M.C., Heijl A., Hyman L., Bengtsson B., and Early Manifest glaucoma Trial Group. Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial: design and baseline data. Ophthalmology 106 (1999) 2144-2153
2. Heijl A., Leske M.C., Bengtsson B., et al., Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial Group. Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol 120 (2002) 1268-1279
3. Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study. 2: Visual field test scoring and reliability. Ophthalmology 101 (1994) 1445-1455
4. Musch D.C., Lichter P.R., Guire K.E., Standardi C.L., and CIGTS Study Group. The Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study: study design, methods, and baseline characteristics of enrolled patients. Ophthalmology 106 (1999) 653-662
5. Smith S.D., Katz J., and Quigley H.A. Analysis of progressive change in automated visual fields in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 37 (1996) 1419-1428
6. Spry P.G., and Johnson C.A. Identification of progressive glaucomatous visual field loss. Surv Ophthalmol 47 (2002) 158-173
7. Vesti E., Johnson C.A., and Chauhan B.C. Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44 (2003) 3873-3879
8. Mayama C., Araie M., Suzuki Y., et al. Statistical evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of methods used to determine the progression of visual field defects in glaucoma. Ophthalmology 111 (2004) 2117-2125
9. Boden C., Blumenthal E.Z., Pascual J., et al. Patterns of glaucomatous visual field progression identified by three progression criteria. Am J Ophthalmol 138 (2004) 1029-1036
10. Katz N., Congdon N., and Friedman D.S. Methodological variations in estimating apparent progressive visual field loss in clinical trials of glaucoma treatment. Arch Ophthalmol 117 (1999) 1137-1142
11. Åsman P., and Heijl A. Glaucoma Hemifield Test: automated visual field evaluation. Arch Ophthalmol 110 (1992) 812-819
12. Heijl A., Lindgren G., and Lindgren A. Extended empirical statistical package for evaluation of single and multiple fields in glaucoma: Statpac 2. In: Mills R.P., and Heijl A. (Eds). Perimetry Update 1990/1991 (1991), Kugler & Ghediniz, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 303-315
13. Bengtsson B., Lindgren A., Heijl A., et al. Perimetric probability maps to separate change caused by glaucoma from that caused by cataract. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 75 (1997) 184-188
14. Heijl A., Leske M.C., Bengtsson B., et al., EMGT Group. Measuring visual field progression in the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 81 (2003) 286-293
15. Leske M.C., Heijl A., Hussein M., et al., Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial Group. Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Arch Ophthalmol 121 (2003) 48-56
16. Landis J.R., and Koch G.C. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33 (1977) 159-174
17. Cochran W.G. The comparison of percentages in matched samples. Biometrika 37 (1950) 256-266
18. McNemar Q. Note on the sampling error of the difference between correlated proportions or percentages. Psychometrika 12 (1947) 153-157
19. Aalen O.O., Bjertness E., and Soønju T. Analysis of dependent survival data applied to lifetimes of amalgam fillings. Stat Med 14 (1995) 1819-1829
20. Bossuyt P.M., Reitsma J.B., Bruns D.E., et al., STARD Group. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Clin Chem 49 (2003) 1-6
21. AGIS Investigators. The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 14. Distinguishing progression of glaucoma from visual field fluctuations. Ophthalmology 111 (2004) 2109-2116
22. Heijl A., Lindgren A., and Lindgren G. Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields. Am J Ophthalmol 108 (1989) 130-135
23. Heijl A., Lindgren A., Lindgren G., and Patella M. Inter-test threshold variability in glaucoma: importance of censored observations and general field status. In: Mills R.P., and Heijl A. (Eds). Perimetry Update 1990/1991 (1991), Kulger & Ghedini, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 189-192
24. Schulzer M. Errors in the diagnosis of visual field progression in normal-tension glaucoma. Ophthalmology 101 (1994) 1589-1594
25. Lee A.C., Sample P.A., Blumenthal E.Z., et al. Infrequent confirmation of visual field progression. Ophthalmology 109 (2002) 1059-1065
26. Nouri-Mahdavi K., Caprioli J., Coleman A.L., et al. Pointwise linear regression for evaluation of visual field outcomes and comparisons with the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study methods. Arch Ophthalmol 123 (2005) 193-199