2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2008.02.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Comparison of Visual Field Progression Criteria of 3 Major Glaucoma Trials in Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial Patients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

5
85
2
6

Year Published

2009
2009
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 120 publications
(98 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
5
85
2
6
Order By: Relevance
“…Differences in the definition of visual field progression may also explain the disparities between our results. Previous studies 20,[35][36][37][38] have shown that different progression criteria do not necessarily identify the same eyes as progressing. The study by Medeiros and colleagues defined SAP progression using an event analysis derived from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial 39 consisting of a change in three or more of the same test points on three follow-up consecutive tests.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Differences in the definition of visual field progression may also explain the disparities between our results. Previous studies 20,[35][36][37][38] have shown that different progression criteria do not necessarily identify the same eyes as progressing. The study by Medeiros and colleagues defined SAP progression using an event analysis derived from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial 39 consisting of a change in three or more of the same test points on three follow-up consecutive tests.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although there is no gold standard for visual field worsening, the EMGT criteria are considered one of the more sensitive techniques among available methods for detection of glaucoma worsening. 9,19 Therefore, the higher proportion of test locations worsening according to PLR in the stable group when less stringent criteria are used likely represents false detection. Using global indices for estimating rates of change with no cutoff criteria for the magnitude of worsening seems reasonable and more intuitive clinically.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While it has been demonstrated that threshold sensitivities uncorrected for generalized depression of the hill of vision (or total deviation data) are superior to corrected sensitivities for detection of worsening with trend analyses, 7,8 the current GPA software uses corrected sensitivities or pattern deviation data and has been shown to be reasonably sensitive and specific. 6,9 Although pointwise event analysis provides clinicians with valuable information regarding possible clinically significant deterioration of the visual field, it does not provide any temporal information (i.e., rates of decay). Significant worsening of the visual field needs to be interpreted within the context of the disease, especially rates of change and the remaining lifetime of the patient.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Progression was defined as worsening of visual fields according to pre-defined criteria 6 based on computerized analyses using glaucoma change probability maps, 7 which have been shown to offer high sensitivity and specificity. 8,9 Glaucoma progression could also be identified as worsening of the disc, which was assessed by masked readings at a disc photography reading center. 6,10 The protocol included a "safety hatch" that entailed an exception to the principle of unchanged therapy; in short, if the IOP in treated eyes exceeded 25 mmHg at two consecutive follow-up visits, additional pressure-lowering eye drops were prescribed.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%