Trial reportInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2013
Series length used during trend analysis affects sensitivity to changes in progression rate in the ocular hypertension treatment study.
Trial report in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00000125 (Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS)
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prediction accuracy of a novel dynamic structure-function model for glaucoma progression.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2014Trial
- Intereye comparison of visual field progression in eyes with open-angle glaucoma.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2023Observational
- Longitudinal Signal-to-Noise Ratio of Perimetry at Different Severities of Glaucoma.Translational vision science & technology · 2023Article
- The Usefulness of Assessing Glaucoma Progression With Postprocessed Visual Field Data.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Article
- Time Lag Between Functional Change and Loss of Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer in Glaucoma.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2020Article
- Comparison of Short- And Long-Term Variability in Standard Perimetry and Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography in Glaucoma.American journal of ophthalmology · 2020Article
- Comparison of Methods to Detect and Measure Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression.Translational vision science & technology · 2019Article
- Self-monitoring of intraocular pressure using Icare HOME tonometry in clinical practice.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2019Article
- Impact of Different Visual Field Testing Paradigms on Sample Size Requirements for Glaucoma Clinical Trials.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Detection of Functional Change Using Cluster Trend Analysis in Glaucoma.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2017Article
- Detecting Change Using Standard Global Perimetric Indices in Glaucoma.American journal of ophthalmology · 2017Article
- Detection and measurement of clinically meaningful visual field progression in clinical trials for glaucoma.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2017Review
- Localized Changes in Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness as a Predictor of Localized Functional Change in Glaucoma.American journal of ophthalmology · 2016Article
- Observational
- What rates of glaucoma progression are clinically significant?Expert review of ophthalmology · 2016Article
- The Effect of Limiting the Range of Perimetric Sensitivities on Pointwise Assessment of Visual Field Progression in Glaucoma.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2016Article
- Structural Measurements for Monitoring Change in Glaucoma: Comparing Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness With Minimum Rim Width and Area.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2015Article
- Assessment of the reliability of standard automated perimetry in regions of glaucomatous damage.Ophthalmology · 2014Article
- Signal-to-Noise Ratios for Structural and Functional Tests in Glaucoma.Translational vision science & technology · 2013Article
- Functional assessment of glaucoma: Uncovering progression.Survey of ophthalmologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTrend analysis techniques to detect glaucomatous progression typically assume a constant rate of change. This study uses data from the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study to assess whether this assumption decreases sensitivity to changes in progression rate, by including earlier periods of stability.
methodsSeries of visual fields (mean 24 per eye) completed at 6-month intervals from participants randomized initially to observation were split into subseries before and after the initiation of treatment (the "split-point"). The mean deviation rate of change (MDR) was derived using these entire subseries, and using only the window length (W) tests nearest the split-point, for different window lengths of W tests. A generalized estimating equation model was used to detect changes in MDR occurring at the split-point.
resultsUsing shortened subseries with W = 7 tests, the MDR slowed by 0.142 dB/y upon initiation of treatment (P < 0.001), and the proportion of eyes showing "rapid deterioration" (MDR <-0.5 dB/y with P < 5%) decreased from 11.8% to 6.5% (P < 0.001). Using the entire sequence, no significant change in MDR was detected (P = 0.796), and there was no change in the proportion of eyes progressing (P = 0.084). Window lengths 6 ≤ W ≤ 9 produced similar benefits.
conclusionsEvent analysis revealed a beneficial treatment effect in this dataset. This effect was not detected by linear trend analysis applied to entire series, but was detected when using shorter subseries of length between six and nine fields. Using linear trend analysis on the entire field sequence may not be optimal for detecting and monitoring progression. Nonlinear analyses may be needed for long series of fields. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000125.).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.