Spatial modeling of visual field data for assessing glaucoma progression

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 54, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 1544-1553

  Betz Stablein, Brigid D ^a   Morgan, William H ^b   House, Philip H ^b   Hazelton, Martin L ^a  

^a MASSEY UNIVERSITY   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGED; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; DISEASE COURSE; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OPTIC DISK; OPTIC NERVE FIBER; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; VISUAL FIELD;

AGED; ALGORITHMS; BAYES THEOREM; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA, OPEN-ANGLE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; OPTIC DISK; OPTIC NERVE DISEASES; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL FIELD TESTS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 84874955938     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: 15525783     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.12-11226     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Kwon YH, Fingert JH, Kuehnn MH, Alward WLM. Primary open-angle glaucoma. New Engl J Med. 2009;360:1113-1124.
2. Kerr NM, Chew SS, Eady EK, Gamble GD, Danesh-Meyer HV. Diagnostic accuracy of confrontation visual field analysis. Neurology. 2010;74:1184-1190.
3. Atres PH, Chauhan BC. Longitudinal changes in the visual field and optic disc in glaucoma. Prog Ret Eye Res. 2005;24:333-354.
4. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J. Normal variability of static perimetric threshold values across the central visual field. Arch Ophthalmol. 1987;105:1544-1549.
5. Chauhan BC, Johnson CA. Test-retest variability of frequencydoubling perimetry and conventional perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1999;40:648-656.
6. Walsh TJ. Visual Fields: Examination and Interpretation. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011.
7. Ernest PJG, ViechtbauerW, Schouten JSAG, et al. The influence of the assessment of visual field progression in glaucoma: a network meta-analysis. Acta Ophthalmol. 2012;90:10-19.
8. Ernest PJG, Viechtbauer W, Schouten JSAG, et al. The evidence base to select a method for assessing glaucomatous visual field progression. Acta Ophthalmol. 2012;90:101-108.
9. Vesti E, Johnson CA, Chauhan BC. Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:3873-3879.
10. Rossetti L, Goni F, Denis P, Bengtsson B, Martines A, Heijil A. Focusing on glaucoma progression and the clinical importance of progression rate measurement. Eye. 2010;24:S1-S7.
11. Fitzke FW, Crabb DP, McNaught AI, Edgar DF, Hitchings RA. Image processing of computerised visual field data. Br J Ophthalmol. 1995;79:207-212.
12. Spry PGD, Johnson CA, Bates AB, Turpin A, Chauhan BC. Spatial and temporal processing of threshold data for detection of progressive glaucomatous visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:173-180.
13. Gardiner SK, Crabb DP, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Reducing noise in a suspected glaucomatous visual fields by using a new spatial filter. Vis Res. 2004;44:839-848.
14. Strouthidis NG, Scott A, Viswanathan AC, Crabb AP, Garway-Heath DF. Monitoring glaucomatous visual field progression: the effect of a novel spatial filter. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:251-257.
15. Strouthidis NG, Scott A, Peter NM, Garway-Heath DF. Optic disk and visual field progression in ocular hypertensive subjects: detection rates, specificity and agreement. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;47:2904-2910.
16. Garway-Heath DF, Poinoosawmy D, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Mapping the visual field to the optic disc in normal tension glaucoma eyes. Ophthalmology. 2000;107:1809-1815.
17. Artes PH, Iwase A, Kitazawa Y, Chauhan BC. Properties of perimetric threshold estimates from full threshold, SITA standard and SITA fast strategies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;42:2654-2659.
18. Banerjee S, Carlin BP, Gelfand AE. Hierarchical Modeling and Analysis for Spatial Data. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall CRC Press; 2004.
19. Besag J, York J, Mollie A. Bayesian image restoration with two applications in spatial statistics. Ann I Stat Math. 1991;43:1-59.
20. Turpin A, Sampson GP, McKendrick AM. Combining ganglion cell topology and data of patients with glaucoma to determine a structure-function map. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50: 3249-3256.
21. Zhu H, Crabb DP, Schlottmann PG, et al. Predicting visual function from the measurements of retinal nerve fiber layer structure. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51:5657-5666.
22. Lawson AB, Browne WJ, Vidal Rodeiro CL. Disease Mapping with WinBUGS and MLwiN. Chichester, West Sussex, England: Chapman & Hall CRC Press; 2003.
23. Gelman A, Jakulin A, Pittau MG, Su Y. A weakly informative default prior distribution for logistic and other regression models. Annals of Applied Statistics. 2008;2:1360-1383.
24. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2005.
25. Gamerman D, Lopes H. Markov Chain Monter Carlo: Stochastic Simulation for Bayesian Inference. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall CRC Press; 2006.
26. Besag J, Kooperberg C. On conditional and intrinsic autoregressions. Biometrika. 1995;82:733-746.
27. Geweke J. Evaluating the accuracy of sampling-based approaches to calculating posterior moments. In: Bernado JM, Dawid AP, Smith FM, eds. Bayesian Statistics 4. Oxford, UK: Claredon Press; 1992:169-193.
28. Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA, Poinoosawmy D, McNaught AI, Crabb DP. Analysis of visual field progression in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1996;80:40-48.
29. Viswanathan AC, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Early detection of visual filed progression in glaucoma: a comparison of PROGRESSOR and STATPAC2. Br J Ophthalmol. 1997;81: 1037-1042.
30. Birch MK, Wishart PK, O'Donnell NP. Determining progressive visual field loss in serial Humphrey visual fields. Ophthalmology. 1995;102:1227-1235.
31. Smith SD, Katz J, Quigley HA. Analysis of progressive change in automated visual fields in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996;37:1419-1428.
32. Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Chauhan BC, et al. A comparison of visual filed progression criteria of 3 major trials in early manifest glaucoma trial patients. Ophthalmology. 2008;115: 1557-1565.
33. Heijl A, Lindgren A, Lindgren G. Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields. Am J Ophthalmol. 1989;108:130-135.
34. Abdi H. Bonferroni test. In: Salkind NJ, Rasmussen K, eds. Encyclopedia of Measurement and Statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.; 2007:104-107.
35. Best N, Richardson S, Thomson A. A comparison of Bayesian spatial models for disease mapping. Stat Methods Med Res. 2005;14:35-59.