Visual field progression in glaucoma: Estimating the overall significance of deterioration with permutation analyses of pointwise linear regression (PoPLR)

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 53, Issue 11, 2012, Pages 6776-6784

  O'Leary, Neil ^a   Chauhan, Balwantray C ^a   Artes, Paul H ^a  

^a DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; DETERIORATION; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FOLLOW UP; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PERMUTATION OF POINTWISE LINEAR REGRESSION; POINTWISE LINEAR REGRESSION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; VISION TEST; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL FIELD DEFECT;

AGED; ALGORITHMS; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL FIELD TESTS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 84867126716     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: 15525783     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.12-10049     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Lindgren A, et al. Extended empirical statistical package for evaluation of single and multiple fields in glaucoma: Statpac 2. In: Mills RP, Heijl A, eds. Perimetry Update 1990/91. Amsterdam: Kugler & Ghedini; 1991:303-315.
2. Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA, Poinoosawmy D, McNaught AI, Crabb DP. Analysis of visual field progression in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996;80:40-48.
3. 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.
4. Vesti E, Johnson CA, Chauhan BC. Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:3873-3879.
5. Henson DB, Chaudry S, Artes PH, Faragher EB, Ansons A. Response variability in the visual field: comparison of optic neuritis, glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and normal eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:417-421.
6. Artes PH, Hutchison DM, Nicolela MT, LeBlanc RP, Chauhan BC. Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46:2451-2457.
7. Fogagnolo P, Sangermani C, Oddone F, et al. Long-term perimetric fluctuation in patients with different stages of glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2011;95:189-193.
8. McNaught AI, Crabb DP, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Visual field progression: comparison of Humphrey Statpac2 and pointwise linear regression analysis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 1996;234:411-418.
9. 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.
10. Nevalainen J, Paetzold J, Papageorgiou E, et al. Specification of progression in glaucomatous visual field loss, applying locally condensed stimulus arrangements. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2009;247:1659-1669.
11. De Moraes CG, Demirel S, Gardiner SK, et al. Effect of treatment on the velocity of visual field progression in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study Observation Group [published online ahead of print March 6, 2012]. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. doi:10.1167/iovs.11-8186.
12. Nouri-Mahdavi K, Hoffman D, Ralli M, Caprioli J. Comparison of methods to predict visual field progression in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125:1176-1181.
13. Wilkins MR, Fitzke FW, Khaw PT. Pointwise linear progression criteria and the detection of visual field change in a glaucoma trial. Eye. 2005;20:98-106.
14. Aung T, Oen FTS, Wong H-T, et al. Randomised controlled trial comparing the effect of brimonidine and timolol on visual field loss after acute primary angle closure. Br J Ophthalmol. 2004; 88:88-94.
15. Fisher RA. Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Edinburgh, London: Oliver and Boyd; 1925.
16. Westfall PH. Combining P values. In: Armitage P, Colton T, eds. Encyclopedia of Biostatistics. 2nd ed. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons; 2005:987-991.
17. Zaykin DV, Zhivotovsky LA, Westfall PH, Weir BS. Truncated product method for combining P-values. Genet Epidemiol. 2002;22:170-185.
18. Fisher RA. The Design of Experiments. Edinburgh, London: Oliver and Boyd; 1935.
19. Dwass M. Modified randomization tests for nonparametric hypotheses. Ann Math Stat. 1957;28:181-187.
20. Good PI. Permutation, Parametric, and Bootstrap Tests of Hypotheses. 3rd ed. New York: Springer; 2005.
21. Pitman EJG. Significance tests which may be applied to samples from any populations. J R Stat Soc. 1937;4(suppl):119-130.
22. Zweig MH, Campbell G. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clin Chem. 1993;39:561-577.
23. Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B, Hussein M. Measuring visual field progression in the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2003;81:286-293.
24. Holmes AP, Blair RC, Watson JD, Ford I. Nonparametric analysis of statistic images from functional mapping experiments. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1996;16:7-22.
25. Nichols TE, Holmes AP. Nonparametric permutation tests for functional neuroimaging: a primer with examples. Hum Brain Mapp. 2002;15:1-25.
26. Patterson AJ, Garway-Heath DF, Strouthidis NG, Crabb DP. A new statistical approach for quantifying change in series of retinal and optic nerve head topography images. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2005;46:1659-1667.
27. O'Leary N, Crabb DP, Mansberger SL, et al. Glaucomatous progression in series of stereoscopic photographs and Heidelberg retina tomograph images. Arch Ophthalmol. 2010;128:560-568.
28. Nouri-Mahdavi K, Zarei R, Caprioli J. Influence of visual field testing frequency on detection of glaucoma progression with trend analyses. Arch Ophthalmol. 2011;129:1521-1527.
29. Wall M, Woodward KR, Doyle CK, Artes PH. Repeatability of automated perimetry: a comparison between standard automated perimetry with stimulus size III and V, matrix, and motion perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:974-979.
30. Artes PH, Chauhan BC. Signal/noise analysis to compare tests for measuring visual field loss and its progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:4700-4708.
31. Schiefer U, Papageorgiou E, Sample PA, et al. Spatial pattern of glaucomatous visual field loss obtained with regionally condensed stimulus arrangements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51:5685-5689.