评估不同计算机显示器上在线圆形对比周边测量的一致性:一项横断面研究。

Q3 Medicine
Journal of Current Glaucoma Practice Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-24 DOI:10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1468
Angela Gong, Lazar Busija, Simon Edward Skalicky
{"title":"评估不同计算机显示器上在线圆形对比周边测量的一致性:一项横断面研究。","authors":"Angela Gong, Lazar Busija, Simon Edward Skalicky","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1468","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim and background: </strong>The aim of this study is to evaluate the agreement between perimetric findings of a novel 24°, 52-loci online circular contrast perimetry (OCCP) application on three different computer monitors to determine its stability of testing across varying displays.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Sixty-one participants (19 healthy controls, 42 with glaucoma) underwent SAP testing followed by OCCP testing on three uncalibrated computer monitors in randomized order: a large-screen (24-inch) desktop personal computer (DPC) (Dell, Texas, US), a 17-inch laptop (LPC) (Dell), and a 14-inch MacBook Pro (MP) (Apple, California, US).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Agreement of mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), and visual field index (VFI)/visual index (VI) values between MP, DPC, and LPC OCCP were strong, with intraclass correlations and Deming's coefficients ranging from 0.96 to 1.00 and 0.93 to 1.03, respectively. When OCCP tests were compared to SAP, ICCs and Deming's coefficients were less strong, ranging from 0.89 to 0.95 and 0.72 to 0.89. Bland-Altman analyses revealed higher biases (2.90 to 3.59 dB) and wider limits of agreement when comparing OCCP to SAP than when comparing OCCP on different monitors. Bland-Altman bias of contrast sensitivities for each 24-2 testing location revealed stronger relationships between OCCP tests on different monitors (-0.82 to 0.78) than between OCCP and SAP tests (-1.53 to 1.32).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>OCCP demonstrates strong levels of test-retest agreement when performed on computer monitors of varying display and moderate to strong levels of correlation to SAP perimetric indices.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>With further enhancements, OCCP could potentially be used on different personal computers, which could help address current challenges in glaucoma care, such as limited access to traditional perimetric testing. This has the potential to expand the scope of glaucoma detection and monitoring, particularly in remote and underserved areas of our community.</p><p><strong>How to cite this article: </strong>Gong A, Busija L, Skalicky SE. Evaluating the Consistency of Online Circular Contrast Perimetry Across Different Computer Monitors: A Cross-sectional Study. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2025;19(1):15-27.</p>","PeriodicalId":15419,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Current Glaucoma Practice","volume":"19 1","pages":"15-27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12096869/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Consistency of Online Circular Contrast Perimetry Across Different Computer Monitors: A Cross-sectional Study.\",\"authors\":\"Angela Gong, Lazar Busija, Simon Edward Skalicky\",\"doi\":\"10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1468\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim and background: </strong>The aim of this study is to evaluate the agreement between perimetric findings of a novel 24°, 52-loci online circular contrast perimetry (OCCP) application on three different computer monitors to determine its stability of testing across varying displays.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Sixty-one participants (19 healthy controls, 42 with glaucoma) underwent SAP testing followed by OCCP testing on three uncalibrated computer monitors in randomized order: a large-screen (24-inch) desktop personal computer (DPC) (Dell, Texas, US), a 17-inch laptop (LPC) (Dell), and a 14-inch MacBook Pro (MP) (Apple, California, US).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Agreement of mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), and visual field index (VFI)/visual index (VI) values between MP, DPC, and LPC OCCP were strong, with intraclass correlations and Deming's coefficients ranging from 0.96 to 1.00 and 0.93 to 1.03, respectively. When OCCP tests were compared to SAP, ICCs and Deming's coefficients were less strong, ranging from 0.89 to 0.95 and 0.72 to 0.89. Bland-Altman analyses revealed higher biases (2.90 to 3.59 dB) and wider limits of agreement when comparing OCCP to SAP than when comparing OCCP on different monitors. Bland-Altman bias of contrast sensitivities for each 24-2 testing location revealed stronger relationships between OCCP tests on different monitors (-0.82 to 0.78) than between OCCP and SAP tests (-1.53 to 1.32).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>OCCP demonstrates strong levels of test-retest agreement when performed on computer monitors of varying display and moderate to strong levels of correlation to SAP perimetric indices.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>With further enhancements, OCCP could potentially be used on different personal computers, which could help address current challenges in glaucoma care, such as limited access to traditional perimetric testing. This has the potential to expand the scope of glaucoma detection and monitoring, particularly in remote and underserved areas of our community.</p><p><strong>How to cite this article: </strong>Gong A, Busija L, Skalicky SE. Evaluating the Consistency of Online Circular Contrast Perimetry Across Different Computer Monitors: A Cross-sectional Study. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2025;19(1):15-27.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15419,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Current Glaucoma Practice\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"15-27\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12096869/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Current Glaucoma Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1468\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Current Glaucoma Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1468","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的和背景:本研究的目的是评估一种新型的24°52位点在线圆形对比度测量(OCCP)应用程序在三种不同的计算机显示器上的周围测量结果之间的一致性,以确定其在不同显示器上测试的稳定性。材料和方法:61名参与者(19名健康对照,42名青光眼患者)进行SAP测试,然后在3台未校准的计算机显示器上随机进行OCCP测试:一台大屏幕(24英寸)台式个人电脑(DPC)(戴尔,德克萨斯州),一台17英寸笔记本电脑(LPC)(戴尔)和一台14英寸MacBook Pro (MP)(苹果,加利福尼亚州,美国)。结果:MP、DPC和LPC OCCP的平均偏差(MD)、模式标准差(PSD)和视野指数(VFI)/视觉指数(VI)值具有较强的一致性,类内相关性和Deming系数分别在0.96 ~ 1.00和0.93 ~ 1.03之间。当OCCP检验与SAP比较时,ICCs和Deming系数较弱,分别为0.89 ~ 0.95和0.72 ~ 0.89。Bland-Altman分析显示,与在不同监视器上比较OCCP时相比,将OCCP与SAP进行比较时,偏差更高(2.90至3.59 dB),一致性范围更广。每个24-2测试位置的对比敏感度的Bland-Altman偏倚显示,不同监视器上的OCCP测试之间的关系(-0.82至0.78)比OCCP和SAP测试之间的关系(-1.53至1.32)更强。结论:OCCP在不同显示的计算机显示器上表现出很强的测试-重测一致性,并且与SAP周边指数具有中等到很强的相关性。临床意义:随着进一步的增强,OCCP可能会在不同的个人电脑上使用,这可能有助于解决当前青光眼护理中的挑战,例如传统的周长检查的限制。这有可能扩大青光眼的检测和监测范围,特别是在我们社区的偏远和服务不足的地区。如何引用本文:Gong A, Busija L, Skalicky SE。评估不同计算机显示器上在线圆形对比周边测量的一致性:一项横断面研究。中华实用青光眼杂志,2015;19(1):15-27。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating the Consistency of Online Circular Contrast Perimetry Across Different Computer Monitors: A Cross-sectional Study.

Aim and background: The aim of this study is to evaluate the agreement between perimetric findings of a novel 24°, 52-loci online circular contrast perimetry (OCCP) application on three different computer monitors to determine its stability of testing across varying displays.

Materials and methods: Sixty-one participants (19 healthy controls, 42 with glaucoma) underwent SAP testing followed by OCCP testing on three uncalibrated computer monitors in randomized order: a large-screen (24-inch) desktop personal computer (DPC) (Dell, Texas, US), a 17-inch laptop (LPC) (Dell), and a 14-inch MacBook Pro (MP) (Apple, California, US).

Results: Agreement of mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), and visual field index (VFI)/visual index (VI) values between MP, DPC, and LPC OCCP were strong, with intraclass correlations and Deming's coefficients ranging from 0.96 to 1.00 and 0.93 to 1.03, respectively. When OCCP tests were compared to SAP, ICCs and Deming's coefficients were less strong, ranging from 0.89 to 0.95 and 0.72 to 0.89. Bland-Altman analyses revealed higher biases (2.90 to 3.59 dB) and wider limits of agreement when comparing OCCP to SAP than when comparing OCCP on different monitors. Bland-Altman bias of contrast sensitivities for each 24-2 testing location revealed stronger relationships between OCCP tests on different monitors (-0.82 to 0.78) than between OCCP and SAP tests (-1.53 to 1.32).

Conclusion: OCCP demonstrates strong levels of test-retest agreement when performed on computer monitors of varying display and moderate to strong levels of correlation to SAP perimetric indices.

Clinical significance: With further enhancements, OCCP could potentially be used on different personal computers, which could help address current challenges in glaucoma care, such as limited access to traditional perimetric testing. This has the potential to expand the scope of glaucoma detection and monitoring, particularly in remote and underserved areas of our community.

How to cite this article: Gong A, Busija L, Skalicky SE. Evaluating the Consistency of Online Circular Contrast Perimetry Across Different Computer Monitors: A Cross-sectional Study. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2025;19(1):15-27.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Current Glaucoma Practice
Journal of Current Glaucoma Practice Medicine-Ophthalmology
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信