ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Real-World Analysis of the Aging Effects on Visual Field Reliability Indices in Humans.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of the Humphrey Field Analyzer and MP-3 Microperimeter in Patients With Glaucoma, Classified by Severity and Misalignment of Test Points.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Association Analysis between Cognitive Function Score and Inner Macular Thickness/Visual Field Sensitivity in Glaucoma Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Roles of Cognitive Function on Visual Field Reliability Indices among Glaucoma Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Real-World Analysis of the Aging Effects on Visual Field Reliability Indices in Central 10-2 Tests.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Spotlight on iPad Visual Field Tests Efficacy.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Relationships between age and visual field (VF) reliability indices were investigated using a large real-world dataset (42,421 VF data points from 11,525 eyes of 5930 subjects). All VFs tested and stored at Shimane University Hospital between 1988 and 2019 were exported. Correlations between age, mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), and reliability indices including fixation losses (FLs), false negatives (FNs), and false positives (FPs) were analyzed. The mean ± standard deviation age was 65.0 ± 15.1 years; MD--6.9 ± 8.1 decibels (dB); PSD-6.3 ± 4.6 dB; FL-8.6 ± 11.7%; FN-5.3 ± 8.3%; and FP-2.6 ± 5.0%. Univariate analyses showed strong associations between age and FNs (correlation coefficient, ρ = 0.20,
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.