Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Computer test logics for automatic perimetry.

A Heijl

    Acta Ophthalmologica
    |October 1, 1977
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Investigating perimetric test logics for glaucoma detection, researchers found that a simpler logic suffices for initial screening of glaucoma suspects. However, complex logics with averaging are better for monitoring existing pathological visual fields.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Optic disc classification by the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph and by physicians with varying experience of glaucoma.

    Eye (London, England)·2011
    Same author

    Focusing on glaucoma progression and the clinical importance of progression rate measurement: a review.

    Eye (London, England)·2010
    Same author

    The malmo high risk ocular hypertension study.

    Journal of glaucoma·2009
    Same author

    Arcuate cluster analysis in glaucoma perimetry.

    Journal of glaucoma·2009
    Same author

    Practical recommendations for measuring rates of visual field change in glaucoma.

    The British journal of ophthalmology·2008
    Same author

    Visual acuity and perimetry as measures of visual function in diabetic macular oedema.

    Diabetologia·2005
    Same journal

    En face localization of retinal telangiectatic capillaries using OCT compared with ICG angiography in chronic vascular macular oedema.

    Acta ophthalmologica·2026
    Same journal

    Usher syndrome-related visual impairment in Finland: A 35-year nationwide register-based study (1985-2019).

    Acta ophthalmologica·2026
    Same journal

    Three years of ocular proton therapy in the Netherlands, clinical results.

    Acta ophthalmologica·2026
    Same journal

    Risk factors for acquisition and severity of Acanthamoeba and Fusarium keratitis in contact lens users-A case-control and clinical-epidemiological study, 2009-2020.

    Acta ophthalmologica·2026
    Same journal

    Distinguish polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy through choroidal alterations: A systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative synthesis.

    Acta ophthalmologica·2026
    Same journal

    Ocular blood flow and retinal oxygen saturation measurements in central retinal artery occlusion.

    Acta ophthalmologica·2026
    See all related articles

    Area of Science:

    • Ophthalmology
    • Medical Technology

    Background:

    • Glaucoma diagnosis and monitoring rely on visual field testing.
    • Different perimetric test logics exist, varying in complexity and time.
    • Understanding the efficacy of these logics is crucial for accurate patient management.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To compare the consistency and accuracy of three perimetric test logics (simple I, complex II & III) in detecting visual field defects.
    • To evaluate the suitability of different test logics for screening glaucoma suspects versus monitoring established glaucoma.

    Main Methods:

    • Experiments were conducted on healthy subjects and glaucoma patients using an automatic computerized perimeter.
    • Computer simulations were also employed to test the perimetric logics.
    • Three distinct test logics were evaluated: one simple and two more complex, involving averaging procedures.

    Related Experiment Videos

    Main Results:

    • Test logic II, utilizing an averaging procedure, demonstrated the best consistency in measured thresholds.
    • Variability in results was greater in patients with pathological visual fields compared to normal fields.
    • While all logics detected defects, the simplest logic was less effective at identifying blind spots compared to more complex logics.

    Conclusions:

    • A simple perimetric test logic is adequate for initial perimetry in glaucoma suspects without documented defects.
    • For follow-up of patients with existing pathological visual fields, a more complex logic, such as one employing averaging, is recommended for improved accuracy and consistency.