Erratum to Diagnostic performance of the ISNT rule for glaucoma based on the heidelberg retinal tomograph (Trans Vis Sci Tech (2013), 2, 5, (2), doi: 10.1167/tvst.2.5.2);Diagnostic performance of the ISNT rule for glaucoma based on the heidelberg retinal tomograph

Translational Vision Science and Technology

Volumn 2, Issue 5, 2013, Pages

  Chan, Errol Wei'en ^a   Liao, Jiemin ^a,b   Wong, Reuben ^c   Loon, Seng Chee ^a   Aung, Tin ^a,b   Wong, Tien Yin ^a,b   Cheng, Ching Yu ^a,b,d  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY HEALTH SYSTEM   (Singapore)

^b SINGAPORE EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Singapore)

^c NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

^d DUKE NUS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (Singapore)

Author keywords

Glaucoma; HRT; ISNT rule

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HEIDELBERG RETINA TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; INFERIOR SUPERIOR NASAL TEMPORAL RULE; MALE; OPTIC DISK; PREDICTIVE VALUE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 84900806049     PISSN: None     EISSN: 21642591     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/tvst.2.5.2a     Document Type: Erratum

References (33)

1. Hitchings RA, Spaeth GL. The optic disc in glaucoma. II. Correlation of the appearance of the optic disc with the visual field. Br J Ophthalmol. 1977;61:107-113.
2. Airakisinen PJ, Drance SM. Neuroretinal rim area and retinal nerve fiber layer in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1985;103:203-204.
3. Jonas JB, Gusek GC, Naumann GO. Optic disc, cup and neuroretinal rim size, configuration and correlations in normal eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1988;29:1151-1158.
4. Jonas JB, Budde WM, Lang P. Neuroretinal rim width ratios in morphological glaucoma diagnosis. Br J Ophthalmol. 1998;82:1366-1371.
5. Harizman N, Oliveria C, Chiang A, et al. The ISNT rule and differentiation of normal from glaucomatous eyes. Arch Ophthalmol. 2006;124: 1579-1583.
6. Progrebniak AE, Wehrung B, Progrebniak KL, Shetty RK, Crawford P. Violation of the ISNT rule in nonglaucomatous pediatric optic disc cupping. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51: 890-895.
7. Morgan JE, Bourtsoukli I, Rajkumar KN, Ansari E, Cunliffe IA, North RV. The accuracy of the inferior. superior. nasal. temporal neuroretinal rim area rule for diagnosing glaucomatous optic disc damage. Ophthalmology. 2012;119:723-730.
8. Sihota R, Srinivasan G, Dada T, Gupta V, Ghate D, Sharma A. Is the ISNT rule violated in early primary open angle glaucoma-a scanning laser tomography study. Eye. 2008;22:819-824.
9. Hemamalini A, George R, Raju P, et al. Neural rim characteristics of healthy southern Indians: the Chennai Glaucoma Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:3457-3464.
10. Rohrschneider K, Burk RO, Kruse FE, Volcker HE. Reproducibility of the optic nerve head topography with a new laser tomographic scanning device. Ophthalmology. 1994;101:1044-1049.
11. Sharma P, Sample PA, Zangwill LM, Schuman JS. Diagnostic tools for glaucoma detection and management. Surv Ophthalmol. 2008;53(suppl): S17-S32.
12. Bathija R, Zangwill L, Berry CC, et al. Detection of early glaucomatous structural damage with confocal scanning laser tomography. J Glaucoma. 1998;7:121-127.
13. Zangwill LM, Bowd C, Berry CC, et al. Discriminating between normal and glaucomatous eyes using the Heidelberg retina tomography, GDx nerve fiber analyzer, and optical coherence tomography. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001; 119:985-993.
14. Greaney MJ, Hoffman DC, Garway-Heath DF, et al. Comparison of optic nerve imaging methods to distinguish normal eyes from those with glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43: 140-145.
15. Zangwill LM, Jain S, Racette L, et al. The effect of disc size and severity of disease on the diagnostic accuracy of the Heidelberg retina tomography glaucoma probability score. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:2653-2660.
16. Oddone F, Centofanti M, Iester M, et al. Sectorbased analysis with the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph 3 across disc sizes and glaucoma stages. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:1106-1111.
17. Ferreras A, Pajarin AB, Polo V, Larrosa JM, Pablo LE, Honrubia FM. Diagnostic ability of the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph 3 Classifications. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:1981-1987.
18. Iester M, Mikelberg FS, Drance SM. The effect of optic disc size on diagnostic precision with the Heidelberg retina tomography. Ophthalmology. 1997;104:545-548.
19. Zheng Y, Wong TY, Lamoureux EL, et al. Diagnostic ability of Heidelberg retina tomography in detecting glaucoma in a population setting. Ophthalmology. 2010;117:290-297.
20. Foong AW, Saw SM, Loo JL, et al. Rational and methodology for a population-based study of eye disease in Malay people: the Singapore Malay Eye Study (SiMES). Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2007; 14:25-35.
21. Shen SY, Wong TY, Foster PJ. The prevalence and types of glaucoma in Malay people: the Singapore Malay Eye Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:3846-3851.
22. Lavanya R, Jeganathan VS, Zheng Y, et al. Methodology of the Singapore Indian Chinese Cohort (SICC) Eye Study: quantifying ethic variations in the epidemiology of eye disease in Asians. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2009;16:325-336.
23. Foster PJ, Buhrmann R, Quigley HA, Johnson GJ. The definition and classification of glaucoma in prevalence surveys. Br J Ophthalmol. 2002;86: 238-242.
24. Hodapp E, Parrish RU, Anderson DR. Classification of glaucomatous field loss by HFA. In: Hodapp E, et al., eds. Clinical Decisions in Glaucoma. St. Louis, MO: CV Mosby; 1993:52-61.
25. Heidelberg Retina Tomograph Glaucoma Module. Operating instructions. Software version 3.0. Heidelberg, Germany: Heidelberg Engineering; 2005.
26. Rutter CM. Bootstrap estimation of diagnostic accuracy with patient-clustered data. AcadRadiol. 2000;7413-7419.
27. R Development Core Team. R: A language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; ISBN 3-900051-07-0, 2012. Available at: http://www.R-project.org.
28. Leisenring W, Pepe MS, Longton G. A marginal regression modelling framework for evaluating medical diagnostic tests. Stat Med. 1997;16:1263-1281.
29. Martus P, Stroux A, Junemann AM, et al. GEE approaches to marginal regression models for medical diagnostic tests. Stat Med. 2004;23:1377-1398.
30. Medeiros FA, Zangwill LM, Bowd C, et al. Influence of disease severity and optic disc size on the diagnostic performance of imaging instruments in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47:1008-1015.
31. Shunmugam M, Azuara-blanco A. The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies in glaucoma using the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47:2317-2323.
32. Oddone F, Centofanti M, Rossetti L, et al. Exploring the Heidelberg retinal tomography 3 diagnostic accuracy across disc sizes and glaucoma stages. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:1358-1365.
33. Hawker MJ, Vernon SA, Ainsworth G. Specificity of the Heidelberg retina tomograph's diagnostic algorithms in a normal elderly population: the Bridlington Eye Assessment project. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:778-785.