ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2021
Detecting Progression of Retinitis Pigmentosa Using the Binomial Pointwise Linear Regression Method.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigating the clinical validity of the guided progression analysis definition with 10-2 visual field in retinitis pigmentosa.PloS one · 2023Article
- Trends in research related to ophthalmic microperimetry from 1992 to 2022: A bibliometric analysis and knowledge graph study.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
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 at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: A method of evaluating central visual field (VF) progression in eyes with retinitis pigmentosa (RP) has still to be established. We previously reported the potential merit of applying a binomial test to pointwise linear regression (binomial PLR) in glaucoma progression. In the current study, we investigated the usefulness of binomial PLR in eyes with RP. Methods: A series of 10 VFs (VF 1-10, Humphrey field analyzer, 10-2 test) from 196 eyes of 103 patients with RP were collected retrospectively. The PLR was performed by regressing the total deviation of all test points with the complete series of 10 VFs. The accuracy (positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and false-positive rate) and the time required to detect VF progression with shorter VF series (from VF 1-5 to VF 1-9) were compared across the binomial PLR, a permutation analysis of PLR (PoPLR), and a mean deviation (MD) trend analysis. Results: In evaluating VF progression, the binomial PLR was comparable with the PoPLR and MD trend analyses in its positive predictive value (0.55 to 0.95), negative predictive value (0.67 to 0.92), and false-positive rate (0.01 to 0.05). The binomial PLR required significantly less time to detect VF progression (5.0 ± 2.0 years) than the PoPLR and MD trend analyses (P < 0.01, P < 0.001, respectively). Conclusions: The application of a binomial PLR achieved reliable and earlier detection of central VF progression in eyes with RP. Translational Relevance: A binomial PLR was useful in assessing VF progression in RP.
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.