Determining progression in glaucoma using visual fields

Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (Subseries of Lecture Notes in Computer Science)

Volumn 2035, Issue , 2001, Pages 136-147

  Turpin, Andrew ^a   Frank, Eibe ^b   Hall, Mark ^b   Witten, Ian H ^b   Johnson, Chris A ^a  

^a DEVERS EYE INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DIAGNOSIS; DISEASES; OPHTHALMOLOGY; VISION;

AUTOMATIC TECHNIQUE; DATA MINING COMMUNITY; DATA MINING PROBLEMS; DIAGNOSTIC TOOLS; EYE DISEASE; VISUAL AREAS; VISUAL FIELDS;

DATA MINING;

EID: 84942928268     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-45357-1_17     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. P. Armitage and G. Berry. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. Blackwell Scientific Pulications, Oxford, third edition, 1994.
2. M.K. Birch, P.K. Wishart, and N.P. O'Donnell. Determining progressive visual field loss in serial humphrey visual fields. Ophthomology, 102(8):1227-1235, 1995.
3. L. Brigatti, K. Nouri-Mahdavi, M. Weitzman, and J. Caprioli. Automatic detec- tion of glaucomatous visual field progression with neural networks. Archives of Ophthalmol., 115:725-728, 1997.
4. R.O. Burk, A. Tuulonen, and P.J. Airaksinen. Laser scanning tomography of localised nerve fibre layer defects. British J. of Ophthalmol, 82(10):1112-1117, 1998.
5. B.C. Chauhan and C.A. Johnson. Test-retest variability of frequency-doubling perimetry and conventional perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal subjects. Investigative Ophthomology and Vision Science, 40(3):648-656, 1999.
6. B.C. Chauhan, S.M.Drance, and G.R. Douglas. The use of visual field indices in detecting changes in the visual field in glaucoma. Investigative Ophthomology and Vision Science, 31(3):512-520, 1990.
7. C. Cortes and V. Vapnik. Support vector networks. Machine Learning, 20:273-297, 1995.
8. D.P. Crabb, F.W. Fitzke, A.I. McNaught, D.F. Edgar, and R.A. Hitchings. Improv- ing the prediction of visual field progression in glaucoma using spatial processing. Ophthomology, 104(3):517-524, 1997.
9. M. Fingeret and T.L. Lewis. Primary care of the glaucomas. Mc Graw Hill, New York, second edition, 2001.
10. J.H. Friedman. Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. Technical report, Department of Statistics, Stanford University, CA, 1999.
11. D.B. Henson, S.E. Spenceley, and D.R. Bull. Artificial neural network analysis of noisy visual field data in glaucoma. Art. Int. in Medicine, 10:99-113, 1997.
12. R.C. Holte. Very simple classification rules perform well on most commonly used datasets. Machine Learning, 11:63-91, 1993.
13. J. Katz. Scoring systems for measuring progression of visual field loss in clinical trials of glaucoma treatment. Ophthomology, 106(2):391-395, 1999.
14. S. Keerthi, S. Shevade, C. Bhattacharyya, and K. Murthy. Improvements to platt's SMO algorithm for SVM classifier design. Technical report, Dept. of CSA, Ban- glore, India, 1999.
15. J.R. Landis and G.G. Koch. An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics, 33(2):363-374, 1977.
16. T. Leitman, J. Eng, J. Katz, and H.A. Quigley. Neural networks for visual field analysis: How do they compare with other algorithms. J Glaucoma, 8:77-80, 1999.
17. M.C. Leske, A. Heijl, L. Hyman, and B. Bengtsson. Early manifest glaucoma trial: Design and baseline data. Ophthomology, 106(11):2144-2153, 1999.
18. S. Mandava, M. Zulauf, T. Zeyen, and J. Caprioli. An evaluation of clusters in the glaucomatous visual field. American J. of Ophthalmol., 116(6):684-691, 1993.
19. R.K. Morgan, W.J. Feuer, and D.R. Anderson. Statpac 2 glaucoma change prob- Ability. Archive of Ophthalmol., 109:1690-1692, 1991.
20. K. Nouri-Mahdavi, L. Brigatti, M.Weitzman, and J. Caprioli. Comparison of meth- ods to detect visual field progression in glaucoma. Ophthomology, 104(8):1228-1236, 1997.
21. J. Platt. Fast training of support vector machines using sequential minimal opti- mization. In Advances in Kernel Methods|Support Vector Learning. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1998.
22. S.D. Smith, J. Katz, and H.A. Quigly. Analysis of progressive change in auto- mated visual fields in glaucoma. Investigative Ophthomology and Vision Science, 37(7):1419-1428, 1996.
23. P.G.D. Spry, A.B. Bates, C.A. Johnson, and B.C. Chauhan. Simulation of longitu- dinal threshold visual field data. Investigative Ophthomology and Vision Science, 41(8):2192-2200, 2000.
24. J. Weber and H. Ulrich. A perimetric nerve fiber bundle map. International Ophthalmology, 15:193-200, 1991.
25. C.J. Wild and G.A.F.Weber. Introduction to probability and statistics. Department of Statistics, University of Auckland, New Zealand, 1995.
26. J.M. Wild, M.K. Hussey, J.G.Flanagan, and G.E. Trope. Pointwise topographical and longitudinal modeling of the visual field in glaucoma. Investigative Ophtho- mology and Vision Science, 34(6):1907-1916, 1993.
27. J.M. Wild, N. Hutchings, M.K. Hussey, J.G.Flanagan, and G.E. Trope. Point- wise univariate linear regression of perimetric sensitivity against follow-up time in glaucoma. Ophthomology, 104(5):808-815, 1997.
28. Ian H. Witten and Eibe Frank. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques with Java Implementations. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 2000.