IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0282638.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the structure-function relationship between the visual fields measured with variational Bayes linear regression and SITA standard

Author

Listed:
  • Ryo Asaoka
  • Hiroshi Murata
  • Yuri Fujino
  • Shuichiro Aoki
  • Kazunori Hirasawa
  • Nobuyuki Shoji

Abstract

Purpose: We recently constructed an algorithm to measure visual field (VF) using the variational Bayes linear regression (VBLR). This algorithm enabled a faster VF measurement than the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm (SITA) standard while maintaining the test-retest reproducibility (Murata H, et al. Br J Ophthalmol 2021). The current study aimed to compare the structure-function relationship between the SITA standard and VBLR. Method: In 78 eyes of 56 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma, VF measurements were conducted using both SITA standard and VBLR VF, as well as spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. The structure-function relationship was investigated between visual sensitivity and circumpapillary retinal nerve fiber layer in the whole VF. This analysis was repeated for each of the 12 sectors (30 degrees). The strength of the structure-function relationship was evaluated using the second-order bias-corrected Akaike Information Criterion (AICc) index. Result: In the whole VF, AICc values of SITA standard and VBLR were 601.6 and 597.3, respectively. The relative likelihood that VBLR had a better structure-function relationship than the SITA standard was 88.2% (when the entire field was averaged) or 99.9% (when all test points were analyzed in the pointwise manner). With the sector-wise analysis, SITA standard had a better structure-function relationship than VBLR in 1 sector (Superior sector in the retina), whereas VBLR had a better structure-function relationship than SITA standard in 4 sectors (Supero-Nasal, Infero-Nasal, Inferior, and Infero-Temporal sectors) with >95% relative likelihood. Conclusion: Although it depends on locations and similar between SITA standard and VBLR-VF, but VBLR-VF had a better structure-function relationship than the SITA standard overall.

Suggested Citation

  • Ryo Asaoka & Hiroshi Murata & Yuri Fujino & Shuichiro Aoki & Kazunori Hirasawa & Nobuyuki Shoji, 2023. "Comparing the structure-function relationship between the visual fields measured with variational Bayes linear regression and SITA standard," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(3), pages 1-10, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0282638
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282638
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0282638
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0282638&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0282638?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0282638. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.