Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 4 September 2008
- Published on: 28 July 2008
- Published on: 4 September 2008Authors' ReplyShow More
Dear Editor
We thank Dr. Alm for his interest and comment on our paper entitled “Practical recommendations for measuring rates of visual field change in glaucoma.” We agree that the standard error of slope estimates is dependent on the number of examinations and duration of follow-up. However, these two parameters are not interchangeable. As pointed out correctly by Dr. Alm, the same number of examinations ov...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 28 July 2008Is a field every 4 month a significant improvement over a field every 6 months?Show More
Dear Editors
How often should we do visual fields in the first 2 years? Chauhan and co-workers [1] recommend 3 visual fields per year. It will have an 80% power of detecting a rate of loss of 2 dB/year in an eye with moderate variability. Is this a significant improvement over 2 fields per year? In order to answer that we should look at the efficacy of increasing the frequency of field examinations versus prolongin...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.