What rates of glaucoma progression are clinically significant?

References

• Quigley HA, Broman AT. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90(3):262–267.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Artes PH, Iwase A, Ohno Y, et al. Properties of perimetric threshold estimates from full threshold, SITA standard, and SITA fast strategies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43(8):2654–2659.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henson DB, Chaudry S, Artes PH, et al. Response variability in the visual field: comparison of optic neuritis, glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and normal eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41(2):417–421.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russell RA, Crabb DP, Malik R, et al. The relationship between variability and sensitivity in large-scale longitudinal visual field data. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53(10):5985–5990.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heijl A, Lindgren A, Lindgren G. Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields. Am J Ophthalmol. 1989;108(2):130–135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abe RY, Gracitelli CP, Medeiros FA. The use of spectral-domain optical coherence tomography to detect glaucoma progression. Open Ophthalmol J. 2015;9:78–88.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Alencar LM, Zangwill LM, Weinreb RN, et al. A comparison of rates of change in neuroretinal rim area and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in progressive glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51(7):3531–3539.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leung CK, Yu M, Weinreb RN, et al. Retinal nerve fiber layer imaging with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography: a prospective analysis of age-related loss. Ophthalmology. 2012;119(4):731–737.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu T, Tatham AJ, Gracitelli CPB, et al. Rates of retinal nerve fiber layer loss in contralateral eyes of glaucoma patients with unilateral progression by conventional methods. Ophthalmology. 2015;122(11):2243–2251.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miki A, Medeiros FA, Weinreb RN, et al. Rates of retinal nerve fiber layer thinning in glaucoma suspect eyes. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(7):1350–1358.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vianna JR, Danthurebandara VM, Sharpe GP, et al. Importance of normal aging in estimating the rate of glaucomatous neuroretinal rim and retinal nerve fiber layer loss. Ophthalmology. 2015;122(12):2392–2398.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zangwill LM, Jain S, Dirkes K, et al. The rate of structural change: the confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy ancillary study to the ocular hypertension treatment study. Am J Ophthalmol. 2013;155(6):971–982.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gracitelli CP, Tatham AJ, Zangwill LM, et al. Estimated rates of retinal ganglion cell loss in glaucomatous eyes with and without optic disc hemorrhages. PLoS One. 2014;9(8):e105611.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros FA, Zangwill LM, Anderson DR, et al. Estimating the rate of retinal ganglion cell loss in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2012;154(5):814–824.e1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, et al. Natural history of open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(12):2271–2276.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chauhan BC, Malik R, Shuba LM, et al. Rates of glaucomatous visual field change in a large clinical population. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55(7):4135–4143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heijl A, Buchholz P, Norrgren G, et al. Rates of visual field progression in clinical glaucoma care. Acta Ophthalmol. 2013;91(5):406–412.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirwan JF, Hustler A, Bobat H, et al. Portsmouth visual field database: an audit of glaucoma progression. Eye (Lond). 2014;28(8):974–979.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders LJ, Russell RA, Kirwan JF, et al. Examining visual field loss in patients in glaucoma clinics during their predicted remaining lifetime. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55(1):102–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aptel F, Aryal-Charles N, Giraud J-M, et al. Progression of visual field in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma - ProgF study 1. Acta Ophthalmol. 2015;93:e615–e620.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bengtsson B, Patella VM, Heijl A. Prediction of glaucomatous visual field loss by extrapolation of linear trends. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(12):1610–1615.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leung CK, Liu S, Weinreb RN, et al. Evaluation of retinal nerve fiber layer progression in glaucoma a prospective analysis with neuroretinal rim and visual field progression. Ophthalmology. 2011;118(8):1551–1557.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spry PG, Johnson CA. Senescent changes of the normal visual field: an age-old problem. Optom Vis Sci. 2001;78(6):436–441.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodapp E, Parrish RKI, Anderson DR. Clinical decisions in glaucoma. St Louis (MO): The CV Mosby Co; 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Disability evaluation under social security (Blue book-August 2010) 2.00 Special senses and speech - Adult [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2015 Dec 14]. Available from: http://www.ssa.gov/disability/ professionals/bluebook/2.00-SpecialSensesandSpeech-Adult.htm#203
   Google Scholar
• Chauhan BC, Mikelberg FS, Balaszi AG, et al. Canadian glaucoma study: 2. risk factors for the progression of open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(8):1030–1036.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, et al. The ocular hypertension treatment study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(6):714–730; discussion 829–830.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leske MC, Heijl A, Hyman L, et al. Predictors of long-term progression in the early manifest glaucoma trial. Ophthalmology. 2007;114(11):1965–1972.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mukesh BN, McCarty CA, Rait JL, et al. Five-year incidence of open-angle glaucoma: the visual impairment project. Ophthalmology. 2002;109(6):1047–1051.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chauhan BC, Mikelberg FS, Artes PH, et al. Canadian glaucoma study: 3. Impact of risk factors and intraocular pressure reduction on the rates of visual field change. Arch Ophthalmol. 2010;128(10):1249–1255.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• De Moraes CG, Prata TS, Tello C, et al. Glaucoma with early visual field loss affecting both hemifields and the risk of disease progression. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(9):1129–1134.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kim KE, Jeoung JW, Kim DM, et al. Long-term follow-up in preperimetric open-angle glaucoma: progression rates and associated factors. Am J Ophthalmol. 2015;159(1):160–162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros FA, Zangwill LM, Mansouri K, et al. Incorporating risk factors to improve the assessment of rates of glaucomatous progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53(4):2199–2207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prata TS, De Moraes CGV, Teng CC, et al. Factors affecting rates of visual field progression in glaucoma patients with optic disc hemorrhage. Ophthalmology. 2010;117(1):24–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teng CC, De Moraes CGV, Prata TS, et al. Beta-zone parapapillary atrophy and the velocity of glaucoma progression. Ophthalmology. 2010;117(5):909–915.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bengtsson B, Heijl A. A visual field index for calculation of glaucoma rate of progression. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008;145(2):343–353.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen PP. Blindness in patients with treated open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2003;110(4):726–733.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattenhauer MG, Johnson DH, Ing HH, et al. The probability of blindness from open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1998;105(11):2099–2104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwon YH, Kim CS, Zimmerman MB, et al. Rate of visual field loss and long-term visual outcome in primary open-angle glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001;132(1):47–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chauhan BC, Garway-Heath DF, Goñi FJ, et al. Practical recommendations for measuring rates of visual field change in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2008;92(4):569–573.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hood DC, Kardon RH. A framework for comparing structural and functional measures of glaucomatous damage. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2007;26(6):688–710.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee J-W, Kim E-A, Otarola F, et al. The fast component of visual field decay rate correlates with disc rim area change throughout the entire range of glaucomatous damage. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015;56(10):5997–6006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poli A, Strouthidis NG, Ho TA, et al. Analysis of HRT images: comparison of reference planes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49(9):3970–3975.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• See JL, Nicolela MT, Chauhan BC. Rates of neuroretinal rim and peripapillary atrophy area change: a comparative study of glaucoma patients and normal controls. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(5):840–847.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chauhan BC, Danthurebandara VM, Sharpe GP, et al. Bruch’s membrane opening minimum rim width and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in a normal white population: a multicenter study. Ophthalmology. 2015;122(9):1786–1794.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammel N, Belghith A, Medeiros FA, et al. Diagnostic Innovations in Glaucoma Study (DIGS): comparing the rates of peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer and ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer loss in healthy and glaucoma eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci ARVO E. Abstract 4568. 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Wessel JM, Horn FK, Tornow RP, et al. Longitudinal analysis of progression in glaucoma using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(5):3613–3620.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros FA, Lisboa R, Zangwill LM, et al. Evaluation of progressive neuroretinal rim loss as a surrogate end point for development of visual field loss in glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(1):100–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardiner SK, Ren R, Yang H, et al. A method to estimate the amount of neuroretinal rim tissue in glaucoma: comparison with current methods for measuring rim area. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;157(3):540–542.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardiner SK, Boey PY, Yang H, et al. Structural measurements for monitoring change in glaucoma: comparing retinal nerve fiber layer thickness with minimum rim width and area. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015;56(11):6886–6891.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meira-Freitas D, Lisboa R, Tatham A, et al. Predicting progression in glaucoma suspects with longitudinal estimates of retinal ganglion cell counts. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(6):4174–4183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mwanza J-C, Budenz DL, Warren JL, et al. Retinal nerve fibre layer thickness floor and corresponding functional loss in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(6):732–737.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardiner SK, Swanson WH, Goren D, et al. Assessment of the reliability of standard automated perimetry in regions of glaucomatous damage. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(7):1359–1369.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gracitelli CP, Abe RY, Tatham AJ, et al. Association between progressive retinal nerve fiber layer loss and longitudinal change in quality of life in glaucoma. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133(4):384–390.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tatham AJ, Boer ER, Rosen PN, et al. Glaucomatous retinal nerve fiber layer thickness loss is associated with slower reaction times under a divided attention task. Am J Ophthalmol. 2014;158(5):1008–1017.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glen FC, Crabb DP, Garway-Heath DF. The direction of research into visual disability and quality of life in glaucoma. BMC Ophthalmol. 2011;11:19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heijl A, Aspberg J, Bengtsson B. The effect of different criteria on the number of patients blind from open-angle glaucoma. BMC Ophthalmol. 2011;11:31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viswanathan AC, McNaught AI, Poinoosawmy D, et al. Severity and stability of glaucoma: patient perception compared with objective measurement. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117(4):450–454.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chan EW, Chiang PPC, Wong TY, et al. Impact of glaucoma severity and laterality on vision-specific functioning: the Singapore Malay eye study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(2):1169–1175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg I, Clement CI, Chiang TH, et al. Assessing quality of life in patients with glaucoma using the glaucoma quality of life-15 (GQL-15) questionnaire. J Glaucoma. 2009;18(1):6–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKean-Cowdin R, Wang Y, Wu J, et al. Impact of visual field loss on health-related quality of life in glaucoma: the Los Angeles Latino eye study. Ophthalmology. 2008;115(6):941–948.e1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Gestel A, Webers CAB, Beckers HJM, et al. The relationship between visual field loss in glaucoma and health-related quality-of-life. Eye (Lond). 2010;24(12):1759–1769.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhargava JS, Patel B, Foss AJE, et al. Views of glaucoma patients on aspects of their treatment: an assessment of patient preference by conjoint analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47(7):2885–2888.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aspinall PA, Johnson ZK, Azuara-Blanco A, et al. Evaluation of quality of life and priorities of patients with glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49(5):1907–1915.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mangione CM, Berry S, Spritzer K, et al. Identifying the content area for the 51-item national eye institute visual function questionnaire: results from focus groups with visually impaired persons. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116(2):227–233.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tabrett DR, Latham K. Important areas of the central binocular visual field for daily functioning in the visually impaired. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2012;32(2):156–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whittaker SG, Lovie-Kitchin J. Visual requirements for reading. Optom Vis Sci. 1993;70(1):54–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramulu PY, West SK, Munoz B, et al. Glaucoma and reading speed: the Salisbury eye evaluation project. Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(1):82–87.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Traynis I, De Moraes CG, Raza AS, et al. Prevalence and nature of early glaucomatous defects in the central 10° of the visual field. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2014;132(3):291–297.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burg A. Vision and driving: a report on research. Hum Factors. 1971;13(1):79–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCloskey LW, Koepsell TD, Wolf ME, et al. Motor vehicle collision injuries and sensory impairments of older drivers. Age Ageing. 1994;23(4):267–273.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owsley C, Ball K, McGwin G, et al. Visual processing impairment and risk of motor vehicle crash among older adults. JAMA. 1998;279(14):1083–1088.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crabb DP, Smith ND, Rauscher FG, et al. Exploring eye movements in patients with glaucoma when viewing a driving scene. PLoS One. 2010;5(3):e9710.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glen FC, Smith ND, Crabb DP. Impact of superior and inferior visual field loss on hazard detection in a computer-based driving test. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(5):613–617.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros FA, Weinreb RN, R Boer E, et al. Driving simulation as a performance-based test of visual impairment in glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2012;21(4):221–227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prado Vega R, Van Leeuwen PM, Rendón Vélez E, et al. Obstacle avoidance, visual detection performance, and eye-scanning behavior of glaucoma patients in a driving simulator: a preliminary study. PLoS One. 2013;8(10):e77294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tatham AJ, Raza AS, De Moraes CG, et al. Relationship between motor vehicle collisions and results of perimetry, useful field of view, and driving simulation in drivers with glaucoma. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2015;4(3):5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gracitelli CP, Tatham AJ, Boer ER, et al. Predicting risk of motor vehicle collisions in patients with glaucoma: a longitudinal study. PLoS One. 2015;10(10):e0138288.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richman J, Lorenzana LL, Lankaranian D, et al. Relationships in glaucoma patients between standard vision tests, quality of life, and ability to perform daily activities. Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2010;17(3):144–151.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotecha A, Richardson G, Chopra R, et al. Balance control in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53(12):7795–7801.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diniz-Filho A, Boer ER, Gracitelli CPB, et al. Evaluation of postural control in patients with glaucoma using a virtual reality environment. Ophthalmology. 2015;122(6):1131–1138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Black AA, Wood JM, Lovie-Kitchin JE. Inferior field loss increases rate of falls in older adults with glaucoma. Optom Vis Sci. 2011;88(11):1275–1282.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotecha A, Fernandes S, Bunce C, et al. Avoidable sight loss from glaucoma: is it unavoidable? Br J Ophthalmol. 2012;96(6):816–820.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair A, Hinds A, Sanders R. Ten years of glaucoma blindness in Fife 1990-99 and the implications for ophthalmology, optometry and rehabilitation services. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2004;24(4):313–318.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wesselink C, Stoutenbeek R, Jansonius NM. Incorporating life expectancy in glaucoma care. Eye (Lond). 2011;25(12):1575–1580.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke MG, Ewings P, Hanna T, et al. How accurate are doctors, nurses and medical students at predicting life expectancy? Eur J Intern Med. 2009;20(6):640–644.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walz J, Gallina A, Perrotte P, et al. Clinicians are poor raters of life-expectancy before radical prostatectomy or definitive radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2007;100(6):1254–1258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson JR, Clarke MG, Ewings P, et al. The assessment of patient life-expectancy: how accurate are urologists and oncologists? BJU Int. 2005;95(6):794–798.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wirth R, Sieber CC. Health care professionals underestimate the mean life expectancy of older people. Gerontology. 2012;58(1):56–59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azarbod P, Mock D, Bitrian E, et al. Validation of point-wise exponential regression to measure the decay rates of glaucomatous visual fields. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53(9):5403–5409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pathak M, Demirel S, Gardiner SK. Nonlinear, multilevel mixed-effects approach for modeling longitudinal standard automated perimetry data in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(8):5505–5513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caprioli J, Mock D, Bitrian E, et al. A method to measure and predict rates of regional visual field decay in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(7):4765–4773.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee JM, Nouri-Mahdavi K, Morales E, et al. Comparison of regression models for serial visual field analysis. Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2014;58(6):504–514.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bryan SR, Vermeer KA, Eilers PHC, et al. Robust and censored modeling and prediction of progression in glaucomatous visual fields. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(10):6694–6700.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardiner SK, Demirel S, De Moraes CG, et al. Series length used during trend analysis affects sensitivity to changes in progression rate in the ocular hypertension treatment study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(2):1252–1259.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertrand V, Fieuws S, Stalmans I, et al. Rates of visual field loss before and after trabeculectomy. Acta Ophthalmol. 2014;92(2):116–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros FA, Alencar LM, Zangwill LM, et al. The relationship between intraocular pressure and progressive retinal nerve fiber layer loss in glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2009;116(6):1125–1133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jia Y, Wei E, Wang X, et al. Optical coherence tomography angiography of optic disc perfusion in glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2014;121(7):1322–1332.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu L, Jia Y, Takusagawa HL, et al. Optical coherence tomography angiography of the peripapillary retina in glaucoma. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133(9):1045–1052.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang X, Jiang C, Ko T, et al. Correlation between optic disc perfusion and glaucomatous severity in patients with open-angle glaucoma: an optical coherence tomography angiography study. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2015;253(9):1557–1564.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bengtsson B, Heijl A. SITA Fast, a new rapid perimetric threshold test. Description of methods and evaluation in patients with manifest and suspect glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1998;76(4):431–437.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Saunders LJ, Russell RA, Crabb DP. Measurement precision in a series of visual fields acquired by the standard and fast versions of the Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm: analysis of large-scale data from clinics. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015;133(1):74–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wall M, Doyle CK, Zamba KD, et al. The repeatability of mean defect with size III and size V standard automated perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(2):1345–1351.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wall M, Woodward KR, Doyle CK, et al. Repeatability of automated perimetry: a comparison between standard automated perimetry with stimulus size III and V, matrix, and motion perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50(2):974–979.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen S, McKendrick AM, Turpin A. Choosing two points to add to the 24-2 pattern to better describe macular visual field damage due to glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2015;99(9):1236–1239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aoyama Y, Murata H, Tahara M, et al. A method to measure visual field sensitivity at the edges of glaucomatous scotomata. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55(4):2584–2591.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chong LX, Turpin A, McKendrick AM. Targeted spatial sampling using GOANNA improves detection of visual field progression. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2015;35(2):155–169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medeiros FA, Leite MT, Zangwill LM, et al. Combining structural and functional measurements to improve detection of glaucoma progression using Bayesian hierarchical models. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2011;52(8):5794–5803.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russell RA, Malik R, Chauhan BC, et al. Improved estimates of visual field progression using bayesian linear regression to integrate structural information in patients with ocular hypertension. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53(6):2760–2769.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu H, Crabb DP, Ho T, et al. More accurate modeling of visual field progression in glaucoma: ANSWERS. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015;56(10):6077–6083.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu H, Russell RA, Saunders LJ, et al. Detecting changes in retinal function: analysis with non-stationary Weibull error regression and spatial enhancement (ANSWERS). PLoS One. 2014;9(1):e85654.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murata H, Araie M, Asaoka R. A new approach to measure visual field progression in glaucoma patients using variational bayes linear regression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55(12):8386–8392.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen Y, Wyatt HJ, Swanson WH, et al. Rapid pupil-based assessment of glaucomatous damage. Optom Vis Sci. 2008;85(6):471–481.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong S, Narkiewicz J, Kardon RH. Comparison of pupil perimetry and visual perimetry in normal eyes: decibel sensitivity and variability. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42(5):957–965.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kardon RH. Pupil perimetry. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 1992;3(5):565–570.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bach M, Poloschek CM. Electrophysiology and glaucoma: current status and future challenges. Cell Tissue Res. 2013;353(2):287–296.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham SL, Klistorner AI, Goldberg I. Clinical application of objective perimetry using multifocal visual evoked potentials in glaucoma practice. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123(6):729–739.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar