More accurate modeling of visual field progression in glaucoma: ANSWERS

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 56, Issue 10, 2015, Pages 6077-6083

  Zhu, Haogang ^a,b   Crabb, David P ^a   Ho, Tuan ^b   Garway Heath, David F ^b  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b and University of Bristol   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Change detection; Nonstationary; Progression; Spatial correlation; Visual field

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS WITH NON STATIONARY WEIBULL ERROR REGRESSION AND SPATIAL ENHANCEMENT METHOD; ARTICLE; DISEASE COURSE; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VISION TEST; VISUAL FIELD; ALGORITHM; CONTROLLED STUDY; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PERIMETRY; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ALGORITHMS; DISEASE PROGRESSION; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; VISUAL FIELD TESTS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 84942133271     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: 15525783     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.15-16957     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Henson DB. Visual Fields. 2nd ed. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2000.
2. 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.
3. Vesti E, Johnson CA, Chauhan BC. Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:3873-3879.
4. O’Leary N, Chauhan BC, Artes PH. Visual field progression in glaucoma: estimating the overall significance of deterioration with permutation analyses of pointwise linear regression (PoPLR). Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:6776-6784.
5. Redmond T, Leary NO, Hutchison DM, Nicolela MT, Artes PH, Chauhan BC. Visual field progression with frequency-doubling matrix perimetry and standard. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2013;131: 1565-1572.
6. Artes PH, Iwase A, Ohno Y, Kitazawa Y, Chauhan BC. Properties of perimetric threshold estimates from Full Threshold, SITA Standard, and SITA Fast strategies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:2654-2659.
7. 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.
8. Russell RA, Crabb DP, Malik R, Garway-Heath DF. The relationship between variability and sensitivity in large-scale longitudinal visual field data. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:5985-5990.
9. Zhu H, Russell RA, Saunders LJ, Ceccon S, Garway-Heath DF, Crabb DP. Detecting changes in retinal function: analysis with non-stationary Weibull error regression and spatial enhancement (ANSWERS). PLoS One. 2014;9:e85654.
10. Pascual J, Schiefer U, Paetzold J, et al. Spatial characteristics of visual field progression determined by Monte Carlo. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:1642-1650.
11. 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.
12. Betz-Stablein BD, Morgan WH, House PH, Hazelton ML. Spatial modeling of visual field data for assessing glaucoma progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54:1544-1553.
13. Chauhan BC, Garway-Heath DF, Goñi FJ, et al. Practical recommendations for measuring rates of visual field change in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2008;92:569-573.
14. Garway-Heath DF, Lascaratos G, Bunce C, Crabb DP, Russell RA, Shah A. The United Kingdom Glaucoma Treatment Study: a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial: design and methodology. Ophthalmology. 2013;120:68-76.
15. Garway-Heath DF, Crabb DP, Bunce C, et al. Latanoprost for open-angle glaucoma (UKGTS): a randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2014;385:1295-1304.
16. 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.
17. Frackowiak RSJ. Human Brain Function. San Diego: Academic Press; 1997.
18. Gardiner SK, Crabb DP. Examination of different pointwise linear regression methods for determining visual field progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:1400-1407.
19. Fung SSM, Lemer C, Russell RA, Malik R, Crabb DP. Are practical recommendations practiced? A national multi-centre cross-sectional study on frequency of visual field testing in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2013;97:843-847.
20. Bryan SR, Vermeer KA, Eilers PHC, Lemij HG, Lesaffre EM. Robust and censored modeling and prediction of progression in glaucomatous visual fields. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013; 54:6694-6700.
21. Pathak M, Demirel S, Gardiner SK. Nonlinear, multilevel mixed-effects approach for modeling longitudinal standard automated perimetry data in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54:5505-5513.
22. Kummet C, Zamba K, Doyle C, Johnson C, Wall M. Refinement of pointwise linear regression criteria for determining glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54:6234-6241.