HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Artes, P. H. Articles by Henson, D. B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Artes, P. H. Articles by Henson, D. B.

Response Time as a Discriminator between True- and False-Positive Responses in Suprathreshold Perimetry

From the Academic Department of Ophthalmology, Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.

PURPOSE. To report on differences between the latency distributions of responses to stimuli and to false-positive catch trials in suprathreshold perimetry. To describe an algorithm for defining response time windows and to report on its performance in discriminating between true- and false-positive responses on the basis of response time (RT).

METHODS. A sample of 435 largely inexperienced patients underwent suprathreshold visual field examination on a perimeter that was modified to record RTs. Data were analyzed from 60,500 responses to suprathreshold stimuli and from 523 false-positive responses to catch trials.

RESULTS. False-positive responses had much more variable latencies than responses to suprathreshold stimuli. An algorithm defining RT windows on the basis of z-transformed individual latency samples correctly identified more than 70% of false-positive responses to catch trials, whereas fewer than 3% of responses to suprathreshold stimuli were classified as false-positive responses.

CONCLUSIONS. Latency analysis can be used to detect a substantial proportion of false-positive responses in suprathreshold perimetry. Rejection of such responses may increase the reliability of visual field screening by reducing variability and bias in a small but clinically important proportion of patients.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. T. Becker, R. Vonthein, N. J. Volpe, and U. Schiefer Factors Influencing Reaction Time during Automated Kinetic Perimetry on the Tubingen Computer Campimeter Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., July 1, 2005; 46(7): 2633 - 2638. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]