| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1 From the Department of Ophthalmology, University of Manchester; and 2 Department of Organisational Health Psychology, University of Manchester Institute of Science & Technology, Manchester, United Kingdom.
PURPOSE. To compare the relationship between sensitivity and response variability in the visual field of normal eyes and eyes with optic neuritis (ON), glaucoma (POAG), and ocular hypertension (OHT).
METHODS. Frequency-of-seeing (FOS) data were collected from four visual field locations in one eye of 71 subjects (12 ON, 25 POAG, 11 OHT, and 23 normal), using a constant stimulus method on an Henson 4000 perimeter (Tinsley Instruments, Croydon, UK). At each location, at least 20 stimuli (subtending 0.5°) were presented for 200 ms at six or more intensities above and below the estimated threshold. The mean and SD of the probit fitted cumulative Normal function were used to estimate sensitivity and response variability. Cluster regression analysis was carried out to determine whether there were differences in the sensitivity-log (variability) relationship between the four groups.
RESULTS. Variability was found to increase with decreased sensitivity for all four groups. The combined data from the four groups was well represented (R2 = 0.57) by the function loge(SD) = A·sensitivity (dB) + B, where the constants A and B were -0.081 (SE, ±0.005) and 3.27 (SE, ±0.15), respectively. Including other statistically significant covariates (false-negative errors, P = 0.004) and factors (diagnosis, P = 0.005) into the model increased the proportion of explained variance to 62% (R2 = 0.62). Stimulus eccentricity (P = 0.34), patient age (P = 0.33), fixation loss rate (P = 0.10), and false-positive rate (P = 0.66) did not reach statistical significance as additional predictors of response variability.
CONCLUSIONS. The relationship between response variability and sensitivity is similar for ON, POAG, OHT, and normal eyes. These results provide supporting evidence for the hypothesis that response variability is dependent on functional ganglion cell density.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A. Turpin, D. Jankovic, and A. M. McKendrick Retesting Visual Fields: Utilizing Prior Information to Decrease Test-Retest Variability in Glaucoma Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., April 1, 2007; 48(4): 1627 - 1634. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. G. Strouthidis, A. Scott, A. C. Viswanathan, D. P. Crabb, and D. F. Garway-Heath Monitoring Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression: The Effect of a Novel Spatial Filter Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., January 1, 2007; 48(1): 251 - 257. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. G. Strouthidis, V. Vinciotti, A. J. Tucker, S. K. Gardiner, D. P. Crabb, and D. F. Garway-Heath Structure and Function in Glaucoma: The Relationship between a Functional Visual Field Map and an Anatomic Retinal Map Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., December 1, 2006; 47(12): 5356 - 5362. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. M. Verdon-Roe, M. C. Westcott, A. C. Viswanathan, F. W. Fitzke, and D. F. Garway-Heath Exploration of the Psychophysics of a Motion Displacement Hyperacuity Stimulus Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., November 1, 2006; 47(11): 4847 - 4855. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. G. Strouthidis, A. Scott, N. M. Peter, and D. F. Garway-Heath Optic disc and visual field progression in ocular hypertensive subjects: detection rates, specificity, and agreement. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., July 1, 2006; 47(7): 2904 - 2910. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. J. Vingrys and A. J. Zele Robust Indices of Clinical Data: Meaningless Means Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., December 1, 2005; 46(12): 4353 - 4357. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. H. Artes, D. M. Hutchison, M. T. Nicolela, R. P. LeBlanc, and B. C. Chauhan Threshold and Variability Properties of Matrix Frequency-Doubling Technology and Standard Automated Perimetry in Glaucoma Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., July 1, 2005; 46(7): 2451 - 2457. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Bjerre, J. R. Grigg, N. R. A. Parry, and D. B. Henson Test-Retest Variability of Multifocal Visual Evoked Potential and SITA Standard Perimetry in Glaucoma Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., November 1, 2004; 45(11): 4035 - 4040. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Turpin, A. M. McKendrick, C. A. Johnson, and A. J. Vingrys Properties of Perimetric Threshold Estimates from Full Threshold, ZEST, and SITA-like Strategies, as Determined by Computer Simulation Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., November 1, 2003; 44(11): 4787 - 4795. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. H. Artes, D. B. Henson, R. Harper, and D. McLeod Multisampling Suprathreshold Perimetry: A Comparison with Conventional Suprathreshold and Full-Threshold Strategies by Computer Simulation Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., June 1, 2003; 44(6): 2582 - 2587. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P G D Spry, C A Johnson, A M McKendrick, and A Turpin Measurement error of visual field tests in glaucoma Br. J. Ophthalmol., January 1, 2003; 87(1): 107 - 112. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. K. Gardiner and D. P. Crabb Examination of Different Pointwise Linear Regression Methods for Determining Visual Field Progression Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., May 1, 2002; 43(5): 1400 - 1407. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S K Gardiner and D P Crabb Frequency of testing for detecting visual field progression Br. J. Ophthalmol., May 1, 2002; 86(5): 560 - 564. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. G. D. Spry, C. A. Johnson, A. B. Bates, A. Turpin, and B. C. Chauhan Spatial and Temporal Processing of Threshold Data for Detection of Progressive Glaucomatous Visual Field Loss Arch Ophthalmol, February 1, 2002; 120(2): 173 - 180. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. H. Artes, D. McLeod, and D. B. Henson Response Time as a Discriminator between True- and False-Positive Responses in Suprathreshold Perimetry Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., January 1, 2002; 43(1): 129 - 132. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. G. D. Spry, C. A. Johnson, A. M. McKendrick, and A. Turpin Variability Components of Standard Automated Perimetry and Frequency-Doubling Technology Perimetry Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., May 1, 2001; 42(6): 1404 - 1410. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Wall, S. G. Punke, T. L. Stickney, C. F. Brito, K. R. Withrow, and R. H. Kardon SITA Standard in Optic Neuropathies and Hemianopias: A Comparison with Full Threshold Testing Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., February 1, 2001; 42(2): 528 - 537. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
