Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAnderson, AJ
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, CA
dc.date.available2014-05-22T07:42:32Z
dc.date.issued2013-03-01
dc.identifierpii: iovs.13-11668
dc.identifier.citationAnderson, A. J. & Johnson, C. A. (2013). How Useful Is Population Data for Informing Visual Field Progression Rate Estimation?. INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 54 (3), pp.2198-2206. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.13-11668.
dc.identifier.issn0146-0404
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11343/32999
dc.descriptionC1 - Journal Articles Refereed
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: Bayesian estimators allow the frequency of visual field progression rates in the population (the prior distribution) to constrain rate estimates for individuals. We examined the benefits of a prior distribution accounting for one of progression's major risk factors--whether intraocular pressure is treated--to gauge the maximum benefit expected from developing priors for other glaucoma risk factors. METHODS: Our prior distribution was derived from published data from either treated (matched-prior condition) or untreated (unmatched-prior condition) glaucoma patients. We simulated MD values (6-monthly) with true underlying progression rates drawn from the same distribution as the prior for the matched-prior condition. We estimated rates through linear regression, and determined the likelihood of obtaining this estimate as a function of a range of true underlying progression rates (the likelihood function). The maximum likelihood estimate of rate was the most likely value of the posterior distribution (the product of the prior distribution and likelihood function). RESULTS: For short (4) visual field series, the matched-prior condition, unmatched-prior condition, and linear regression gave median errors (estimated minus true rate) of 0.02, 0.20, and 0.00 dB/y, respectively. Positive predictive values for determining rapidly progressing (<-1 dB/y) rates were 0.46, 0.42, and 0.38, with negative predictive values of 0.93, 0.94, and 0.95. For more extended series the magnitude of the differences between techniques decreased, although the order was unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Performance shifts in bayesian estimators of visual field progression are modest even when prior distributions do not reflect large risk factors, such as IOP treatment.
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherASSOC RESEARCH VISION OPHTHALMOLOGY INC
dc.subjectVision Science; Optometry and Ophthalmology not elsewhere classified; Hearing
dc.subjectVision
dc.subjectSpeech and Their Disorders; Diagnostic Methods; Health Related to Ageing
dc.titleHow Useful Is Population Data for Informing Visual Field Progression Rate Estimation?
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.identifier.doi10.1167/iovs.13-11668
melbourne.peerreviewPeer Reviewed
melbourne.affiliationThe University of Melbourne
melbourne.affiliation.departmentOptometry And Vision Sciences
melbourne.source.titleINVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE
melbourne.source.volume54
melbourne.source.issue3
melbourne.source.pages2198-2206
melbourne.identifier.arcFT120100407
dc.research.codefor111303
dc.research.codefor111399
dc.research.codeseo2008920107
dc.research.codeseo2008920203
dc.research.codeseo2008920502
melbourne.publicationid194923
melbourne.elementsid506048
melbourne.contributor.authorAnderson, Andrew
dc.identifier.eissn1552-5783
melbourne.conference.locationUnited States
melbourne.identifier.fundernameidAUST RESEARCH COUNCIL, FT120100407
melbourne.accessrightsThis item is currently not available from this repository


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record