Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37693597›Full record

ArticleResearch square2023

Comparison of the TEMPO Binocular Perimeter and Humphrey Field Analyzer.

Takashi Nishida, Robert Weinreb, Juan Arias, Cristiana Vasile, Sasan Moghimi

Abstract readPreprint
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Research square, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Takashi NishidaHamilton Glaucoma Center, Shiley Eye Institute, University of California San Diego.
Robert WeinrebHamilton Glaucoma Center, Shiley Eye Institute, University of California San Diego.
Juan AriasHamilton Glaucoma Center, Shiley Eye Institute, University of California San Diego.
Cristiana VasileHamilton Glaucoma Center, Shiley Eye Institute, University of California San Diego.
Sasan MoghimiHamilton Glaucoma Center, Shiley Eye Institute, University of California San Diego.

Funding

Diagnosis and Monitoring of Glaucoma with Optical Coherence Tomography AngiographyR01EY029058 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI WEINREB, ROBERT N · 2018 to 2024
$4.2M
Monitoring of Glaucoma Patients in Advanced DiseaseR01EY034148 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI Sasan Moghimi Araghi · 2022 to 2026
$2.5M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY029058NEI NIH HHS R01 EY034148
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study compared between TEMPO, a new binocular perimeter, with the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA). Patients were tested with both TEMPO 24 - 2 AIZE-Rapid and HFA 24 - 2 SITA-Fast in a randomized sequence on the same day. Using a mixed-effects model, visual field (VF) parameters and reliability indices were compared. Retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness was measured using Cirrus OCT, and coefficient of determinations for visual field and OCT parameters were calculated and compared using Akaike information criteria. 740 eyes (including 68 healthy, 262 glaucoma suspects, and 410 glaucoma) of 370 participants were evaluated. No significant differences were seen in mean deviation and visual field index between the two perimeters (P > 0.05). A stronger association between VF mean deviation and circumpapillary RNFL was found for TEMPO (adjusted R

Identifiers

PMID37693597
PMCPMC10491334

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.