Skip to main content
Log in

False-negative responses in primary open-angle glaucoma

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Ophthalmology

Abstract

To determine the false-negative response rate in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and its relationship with the mean deviation, we evaluated 286 visual fields of patients with POAG. A high false-negative response rate was found in glaucomatous patients compared with healthy controls. When the mean derivation was compared with the false-negative response rate, a logarithmic correlation was found with Pearson correlation analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Johnson CA, Nelson-Quigg JM. A prospective three-year study of response properties of normal subjects and patients during automated perimetry. Ophthalmology. 1993;100:269–274.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Katz J, Sommer A, Witt K. Reliability of visual field results over repeated testing. Ophthalmology. 1991;98:70–75.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Lee M, Zulauf M, Caprioli J. The influence of patient reliability on visual field outcome. Am J Ophthalmol. 1994;117:756–761.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Katz J, Sommer A. Reliability indexes of automated perimetric tests. Arch Ophthalmol. 1988;106:1252–1254.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Felius J, Langerhost CT, Vander Berg TJ, Greve EL. Oculokinetic perimetry compared with standard perimetric threshold testing. Int Ophthalmol. 1992;16(4–5):221–226.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ates, Y., Yararcan, M., Sefi, N. et al. False-negative responses in primary open-angle glaucoma. Ann Ophthalmol 32, 287–288 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12009-000-0083-5

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12009-000-0083-5

Keywords

Navigation