ArticleScientific reports2022
The number of examinations required for the accurate prediction of the progression of the central 10-degree visual field test in glaucoma.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prediction of visual field progression in glaucoma: existing methods and artificial intelligence.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to investigate the number of examinations required to precisely predict the future central 10-degree visual field (VF) test and to evaluate the effect of fitting non-linear models, including quadratic regression, exponential regression, logistic regression, and M-estimator robust regression model, for eyes with glaucoma. 180 eyes from 133 open angle glaucoma patients with a minimum of 13 Humphrey Field Analyzer 10-2 SITA standard VF tests were analyzed in this study. Using trend analysis with ordinary least squares linear regression (OLSLR), the first, second, and third future VFs were predicted in a point-wise (PW) manner using a varied number of prior VF sequences, and mean absolute errors (MAE) were calculated. The number of VFs needed to reach the minimum 95% confidence interval (CI) of the MAE of the OLSLR was investigated. We also examined the effect of applying other non-linear models. When predicting the first, second, and third future VFs using OLSLR, the minimum MAE was obtained using VF1-12 (2.15 ± 0.98 dB), VF1-11 (2.33 ± 1.10 dB), and VF1-10 (2.63 ± 1.36 dB), respectively. To reach the 95% CI of these MAEs, 10, 10, and 8 VFs were needed for the first, second and third future VF predictions, respectively. No improvement was observed by applying non-linear regression models. As a conclusion, approximately 8-10 VFs were needed to achieve an accurate prediction of PW VF sensitivity of the 10-degree central VF.
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.