Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33244442›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2020

Inter-Eye Association of Visual Field Defects in Glaucoma and Its Clinical Utility.

Bettina Teng, Dian Li, Eun Young Choi, Lucy Q Shen, Louis R Pasquale, Michael V Boland, Pradeep Ramulu, Sarah R Wellik, Carlos Gustavo De Moraes, Jonathan S Myers and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Inter-eye correlation analysis of 24-h IOPs and glaucoma progression.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 10 institutions in 3 countries.

Bettina TengSchepens Eye Research Institute of Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Dian LiSchepens Eye Research Institute of Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Eun Young ChoiSchepens Eye Research Institute of Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Lucy Q ShenMassachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Louis R PasqualeEye and Vision Research Institute of New York Eye and Ear at Mount Sinai, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Michael V BolandWilmer Eye Institute and Division of Health Sciences Informatics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Pradeep RamuluWilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Sarah R WellikBascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, FL, USA.
Carlos Gustavo De MoraesEdward S. Harkness Eye Institute, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Jonathan S MyersWills Eye Hospital, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Siamak YousefiHamilton Eye Institute, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA.
Thao NguyenDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Yuying FanSchepens Eye Research Institute of Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Hui WangSchepens Eye Research Institute of Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Peter J BexDepartment of Psychology, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA.
Tobias ElzeSchepens Eye Research Institute of Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Mengyu WangSchepens Eye Research Institute of Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Harvard University · USSmith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute · USJohns Hopkins Medicine · USMassachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · USJohns Hopkins University · USNortheastern University · USUniversity of Miami · USUniversity of Tennessee Health Science Center · USWills Eye Hospital · US

Funding

VISION RESEARCHP30EY003790 · NEI · SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI Sunil K Chauhan · 1985 to 2026
$25.5M
Gene-Environment Interactions in GlaucomaR01EY015473 · NEI · MASSACHUSETTS EYE AND EAR INFIRMARY · PI PASQUALE, LOUIS ROBERT · 2005 to 2021
$8.3M
Personalizing Glaucoma Diagnosis by Disease Specific Patterns and Individual Eye AnatomyR01EY030575 · NEI · SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI ELZE, TOBIAS · 2019 to 2023
$2.4M
Associating retinal nerve fiber layer thickness with glucose metabolism and diabetic retinopathyR21EY030631 · NEI · SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI ELZE, TOBIAS · 2019 to 2020
$554k
A hybrid artificial intelligence framework for glaucoma monitoringR21EY030142 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCI CTR · PI ELZE, TOBIAS, YOUSEFI, SIAMAK · 2019 to 2020
$499k
Relationship between Glaucoma and the Three-Dimensional Optic Nerve Head Related StructureK99EY028631 · NEI · SCHEPENS EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI WANG, MENGYU · 2019 to 2020
$293k
NEI NIH HHS K99 EY028631NEI NIH HHS P30 EY003790NEI NIH HHS R01 EY015473NEI NIH HHS R01 EY030575NEI NIH HHS R21 EY030142NEI NIH HHS R21 EY030631
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate intereye associations of visual field (VF) defects. Methods: We selected 24-2 VF pairs of both eyes from 63,604 patients tested on the same date with mean deviation (MD) ≥ -12 dB. VFs were decomposed into one normal and 15 defect patterns previously identified using archetypal analysis. VF pattern weighting coefficients were correlated between the worse and better eyes, as defined by MD. VF defect patterns (weighting coefficients > 10%) in the better eye were predicted from weighting coefficients of the worse eye by logistic regression models, which were evaluated by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: Intereye correlations of archetypal VF patterns were strongest for the same defect pattern between fellow eyes. The AUCs for predicting the presence of 15 defect patterns in the better eye based on the worse eye ranged from 0.69 (superior nasal step) to 0.92 (near total loss). The AUC for predicting superior paracentral loss was 0.89. Superior paracentral loss in the better eye was positively correlated with coefficients of superior paracentral loss, central scotoma, superior altitudinal defect, nasal hemianopia, and inferior paracentral loss in the worse eye, and negatively correlated with coefficients of the normal VF, superior peripheral defect, concentric peripheral defect, and temporal wedge. The parameters are presented in the descending order of statistical significance. Conclusions: VF patterns of the worse eye are predictive of VF defects in the better eye. Translational Relevance: Our models can potentially assist clinicians to better interpret VF loss under measurement uncertainty.

Indexed as

GlaucomaVisual FieldsHumansScotomaVision DisordersVisual Field Testsarchetypal analysisinter-eye correlationvisual field

Identifiers

PMID33244442
PMCPMC7683854
OpenAlexW3104593649

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.