Purpose: To assess sensitivity, specificity, and agreement among automated event analysis, automated trend analysis, and expert evaluation to detect glaucoma progression.

Methods: This was a prospective study that included 37 eyes with a follow-up of 36 months. All had glaucomatous disks and fields and performed reliable visual fields every 6 months. Each series of fields was assessed with 3 different methods: subjective assessment by 2 independent teams of glaucoma experts, glaucoma/guided progression analysis (GPA) event analysis, and GPA (visual field index-based) trend analysis. Kappa agreement coefficient between methods and sensitivity and specificity for each method using expert opinion as gold standard were calculated.

Results: The incidence of glaucoma progression was 16% to 18% in 3 years but only 3 cases showed progression with all 3 methods. Kappa agreement coefficient was high (k=0.82) between subjective expert assessment and GPA event analysis, and only moderate between these two and GPA trend analysis (k=0.57). Sensitivity and specificity for GPA event and GPA trend analysis were 71% and 96%, and 57% and 93%, respectively.

Conclusions: The 3 methods detected similar numbers of progressing cases. The GPA event analysis and expert subjective assessment showed high agreement between them and moderate agreement with GPA trend analysis. In a period of 3 years, both methods of GPA analysis offered high specificity, event analysis showed 83% sensitivity, and trend analysis had a 66% sensitivity.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.5301/ejo.5000193DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

trend analysis
28
event analysis
24
sensitivity specificity
16
gpa event
16
analysis
15
gpa trend
12
gpa
9
glaucoma progression
8
visual field
8
analysis expert
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!