Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorMowatt, Graham
dc.contributor.authorBurr, Jennifer Margaret
dc.contributor.authorCook, Jonathan A.
dc.contributor.authorSiddiqui, M. A. Rehman
dc.contributor.authorRamsay, Craig
dc.contributor.authorFraser, Cynthia
dc.contributor.authorAzuara-Blanco, Augusto
dc.contributor.authorDeeks, Jonathan J.
dc.contributor.authorO.A.G. Screening Project Grp
dc.date.accessioned2012-07-02T10:01:02Z
dc.date.available2012-07-02T10:01:02Z
dc.date.issued2008-12
dc.identifier.citationMowatt , G , Burr , J M , Cook , J A , Siddiqui , M A R , Ramsay , C , Fraser , C , Azuara-Blanco , A , Deeks , J J & O.A.G. Screening Project Grp 2008 , ' Screening tests for detecting open-angle glaucoma : systematic review and meta-analysis ' , Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science , vol. 49 , no. 12 , pp. 5373-5385 . https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.07-1501en
dc.identifier.issn0146-0404
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 16573005
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: da5ff9f0-a564-4112-94d4-3522cbe3e12f
dc.identifier.otherWOS: 000261193900028
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 58149252706
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-9478-738X/work/60196148
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10023/2878
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE. To assess the comparative accuracy of potential screening tests for open angle glaucoma (OAG). METHODS. Medline, Embase, Biosis (to November 2005), Science Citation Index (to December 2005), and The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2005) were searched. Studies assessing candidate screening tests for detecting OAG in persons older than 40 years that reported true and false positives and negatives were included. Meta-analysis was undertaken using the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic model. RESULTS. Forty studies enrolling over 48,000 people reported nine tests. Most tests were reported by only a few studies. Frequency-doubling technology (FDT; C-20-1) was significantly more sensitive than ophthalmoscopy (30, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0-62) and Goldmann applanation tonometry (GAT; 45, 95% CrI 17-68), whereas threshold standard automated perimetry (SAP) and Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph (HRT II) were both more sensitive than GAT (41, 95% CrI 14-64 and 39, 95% CrI 3-64, respectively). GAT was more specific than both FDT C-20-5 (19, 95% CrI 0-53) and threshold SAP (14, 95% CrI 1-37). Judging performance by diagnostic odds ratio, FDT, oculokinetic perimetry, and HRT II are promising tests. Ophthalmoscopy, SAP, retinal photography, and GAT had relatively poor performance as single tests. These findings are based on heterogeneous data of limited quality and as such are associated with considerable uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS. No test or group of tests was clearly superior for glaucoma screening. Further research is needed to evaluate the comparative accuracy of the most promising tests. (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:5373-5385) DOI: 10.1167/iovs.07-1501
dc.format.extent13
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofInvestigative Ophthalmology & Visual Scienceen
dc.rightsCopyright 2008 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc. This is the author's version of this article.en
dc.subjectFrequency-doubling-technologyen
dc.subjectVisual-field defectsen
dc.subjectBaltimore eye surveyen
dc.subjectHeidelberg-retina-tomographen
dc.subjectTest accuracy evaluationsen
dc.subjectOptic-nerve damageen
dc.subjectDiagnostic-accuracyen
dc.subjectAutomated perimetryen
dc.subjectOculokinetic perimetryen
dc.subjectIntraocular-pressureen
dc.subjectRE Ophthalmologyen
dc.subject.lccREen
dc.titleScreening tests for detecting open-angle glaucoma : systematic review and meta-analysisen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.description.versionPostprinten
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.School of Medicineen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.07-1501
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.identifier.urlhttp://hdl.handle.net/2164/317en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record