ArticleOphthalmology. Glaucoma
Association of Visual Field Pattern Reversal with Paracentral Visual Field Loss.
Article in Ophthalmology. Glaucoma. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeVisual field (VF) results that show more test points outside normal limits on the pattern deviation map than on the total deviation map have been assumed to be evidence of unreliable VF results. We propose the term pattern reversal to describe this VF finding and explore its association with paracentral loss.
designRetrospective cohort and case-control studies.
participantsGlaucoma and glaucoma suspect patients who completed VF testing in Veteran's Affairs ophthalmology or optometry clinics.
methodsIn the cohort study, VF results were included that demonstrated pattern reversal. The area of pattern reversal was categorized as peripheral, paracentral, or mixed (both peripheral and paracentral). In the case-control study, a group of patients with paracentral loss confirmed on 10-2 VF tests were compared with a control group whose VF results were without paracentral loss.
main outcome measuresIn the cohort study, the calculated false-positive (FP) error rates were compared among groups categorized by area of pattern reversal. In the case-control study, the rates of pattern reversal were compared between patients with and without paracentral loss.
resultsTwo hundred seventeen eyes of 145 patients were included in the cohort study. Visual field results with pattern reversal and mixed loss had significantly higher FP rates compared with those with paracentral or peripheral loss only (16.25% vs. 6.26% and 8.15%, respectively; P < 0.001). Fifty-five eyes of 41 patients were included in the case group and 55 eyes of 41 patients were included in the control group. Patients with paracentral loss were more likely to have history of pattern reversal compared with those without paracentral loss (58.2% vs. 29.1%; P = 0.004). Twelve eyes with paracentral loss had 24-2 VF results that showed defects on the pattern deviation map, but not on the total deviation map.
conclusionsPattern reversal may be associated with paracentral VF loss and is not always associated with elevated FP rates.
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.