The qualitative comparative analysis of the visual field using computer assisted, semi-automated and manual instrumentation: II Statistical analysis
- 1 January 1984
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in Documenta Ophthalmologica
- Vol. 58 (4) , 325-340
- https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00679797
Abstract
A comparative evaluation of the Octopus automated perimeter (Programmes 21 and 31), the Goldmann Bowl perimeter, the Bjerrum Screen and the Friedmann VFAs Mk I and Mk II was carried out on a heterogenous sample of 75 patients. The results for the sample as a whole were analysed statistically in terms of the scoring system developed by Flanagan, Wild, Barnes, Gilmartin, Good and Crews (1984a). Statistically significant differences between the instruments were found at each of the 4 levels of analysis.This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- The qualitative comparative analysis of the visual field using computer assisted, semi-automated and manual instrumentation: I Scoring systemDocumenta Ophthalmologica, 1984
- A Clinical Comparison of Three Computerized Automatic Perimeters in the Detection of Glaucoma DefectsArchives of Ophthalmology (1950), 1981
- A Clinical Comparison of three Computerized Automatic Perimeters in the Detection of Glaucoma DefectsPublished by Springer Nature ,1981
- Detectability of Early Glaucomatous Field DefectsPublished by Springer Nature ,1981
- Reliability of Visual Field Examination in Clinical RoutinePublished by Springer Nature ,1981
- Computerized Profile Perimetry in GlaucomaArchives of Ophthalmology (1950), 1980
- STATIC PERIMETRY: ACCURACY AND FLUCTUATIONSActa Ophthalmologica, 1976
- STATIC PERIMETRY: STRATEGIESActa Ophthalmologica, 1976
- Visual field analyser and threshold.British Journal of Ophthalmology, 1971
- Serial Analysis of Changes in Visual Field Defects, Employing a New Instrument, to Determine the Activity of Diseases Involving the Visual PathwaysOphthalmologica, 1966