ArticleJapanese journal of ophthalmology2025
Development of a reliability criterion for the binocular Esterman visual field test.
Article in Japanese journal of ophthalmology, 2025. 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.
- Reproducibility of VF, OCT, and OCTA in Glaucoma: A Prospective Multi-Visit Study.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
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
purposeTo evaluate the repeatability of the binocular Esterman visual field (bEVF) test and develop a corresponding reliability criterion based on repeatability-associated factors. STUDY
designProspective cross-sectional study.
methodsNinety-five glaucoma patients underwent two bEVF tests on the same day using a Humphrey field analyzer. The repeatability of the bEVF was assessed by the agreement rate for seen and unseen points over all test points between the first and second tests. Factors associated with the repeatability were analyzed with multivariate linear regression analysis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed for those associated factors to identify the reliability criterion.
resultsThe mean agreement rate was 88.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 73.9%, 99.2%). A total of 44 patients (46.3%), 75 patients (78.9%), and 88 patients (92.6%) had agreement rates of more than 90%, 85%, and 80%, respectively. The false positive (FP) response rate of the bEVF test was negatively associated with the agreement rate (p<0.01). The best cutoff value according to the maximum Youden index for the FP response rate of the bEVF test was >7.1% (sensitivity = 71.0% and specificity = 88.0%), while the cutoff value based on a fixed 95% specificity was >12.1% (sensitivity = 28.6%).
conclusionAn approximately 90% agreement rate existed for the bEVF test when applied to glaucoma patients. The FP response rate was associated with the repeatability of the bEVF test, and 8% or at least 13% may serve as a useful reference to ensure an agreement rate of 80% or higher.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40542981What 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.