海德堡视网膜断层扫描-3中种族特异性数据库区分早期青光眼和正常人的比较。

IF 0.4 Q4 OPHTHALMOLOGY Open Ophthalmology Journal Pub Date : 2017-02-28 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.2174/1874364101711010040
Xiu Ling Tan, Sae Cheong Yap, Xiang Li, Leonard W Yip
{"title":"海德堡视网膜断层扫描-3中种族特异性数据库区分早期青光眼和正常人的比较。","authors":"Xiu Ling Tan,&nbsp;Sae Cheong Yap,&nbsp;Xiang Li,&nbsp;Leonard W Yip","doi":"10.2174/1874364101711010040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the diagnostic accuracy of the 3 race-specific normative databases in Heidelberg Retina Tomography (HRT)-3, in differentiating between early glaucomatous and healthy normal Chinese eyes.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>52 healthy volunteers and 25 glaucoma patients were recruited for this prospective cross-sectional study. All underwent standardized interviews, ophthalmic examination, perimetry and HRT optic disc imaging. Area under the curve (AUC) receiver operating characteristics, sensitivity and specificity were derived to assess the discriminating abilities of the 3 normative databases, for both Moorfields Regression Analysis (MRA) and Glaucoma Probability Score (GPS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significantly higher percentage (65%) of patients were classified as \"within normal limits\" using the MRA-Indian database, as compared to the MRA-Caucasian and MRA-African-American databases. However, for GPS, this was observed using the African-American database. For MRA, the highest sensitivity was obtained with both Caucasian and African-American databases (68%), while the highest specificity was from the Indian database (94%). The AUC for discrimination between glaucomatous and normal eyes by MRA-Caucasian, MRA-African-American and MRA-Indian databases were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.67-0.88), 0.79 (0.69-0.89) and 0.73 (0.63-0.84) respectively. For GPS, the highest sensitivity was obtained using either Caucasian or Indian databases (68%). The highest specificity was seen with the African-American database (98%). The AUC for GPS-Caucasian, GPS-African-American and GPS-Indian databases were 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.87), 0.77 (0.67-0.87) and 0.76 (0.66-0.87) respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Comparison of the 3 ethnic databases did not reveal significant differences to differentiate early glaucomatous from normal Chinese eyes.</p>","PeriodicalId":46347,"journal":{"name":"Open Ophthalmology Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5362979/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Ethnic-specific Databases in Heidelberg Retina Tomography-3 to Discriminate Between Early Glaucoma and Normal Chinese Eyes.\",\"authors\":\"Xiu Ling Tan,&nbsp;Sae Cheong Yap,&nbsp;Xiang Li,&nbsp;Leonard W Yip\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1874364101711010040\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the diagnostic accuracy of the 3 race-specific normative databases in Heidelberg Retina Tomography (HRT)-3, in differentiating between early glaucomatous and healthy normal Chinese eyes.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>52 healthy volunteers and 25 glaucoma patients were recruited for this prospective cross-sectional study. All underwent standardized interviews, ophthalmic examination, perimetry and HRT optic disc imaging. Area under the curve (AUC) receiver operating characteristics, sensitivity and specificity were derived to assess the discriminating abilities of the 3 normative databases, for both Moorfields Regression Analysis (MRA) and Glaucoma Probability Score (GPS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significantly higher percentage (65%) of patients were classified as \\\"within normal limits\\\" using the MRA-Indian database, as compared to the MRA-Caucasian and MRA-African-American databases. However, for GPS, this was observed using the African-American database. For MRA, the highest sensitivity was obtained with both Caucasian and African-American databases (68%), while the highest specificity was from the Indian database (94%). The AUC for discrimination between glaucomatous and normal eyes by MRA-Caucasian, MRA-African-American and MRA-Indian databases were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.67-0.88), 0.79 (0.69-0.89) and 0.73 (0.63-0.84) respectively. For GPS, the highest sensitivity was obtained using either Caucasian or Indian databases (68%). The highest specificity was seen with the African-American database (98%). The AUC for GPS-Caucasian, GPS-African-American and GPS-Indian databases were 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.87), 0.77 (0.67-0.87) and 0.76 (0.66-0.87) respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Comparison of the 3 ethnic databases did not reveal significant differences to differentiate early glaucomatous from normal Chinese eyes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46347,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Ophthalmology Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5362979/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Ophthalmology Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874364101711010040\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Ophthalmology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874364101711010040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:比较海德堡视网膜断层扫描(HRT)-3中3个种族特异性标准数据库对中国早期青光眼与健康正常眼的诊断准确性。方法:招募52名健康志愿者和25名青光眼患者进行前瞻性横断面研究。所有患者均接受标准化访谈、眼科检查、眼周检查和HRT视盘成像。推导曲线下面积(AUC)受者工作特征、敏感性和特异性,评估3个标准数据库对Moorfields回归分析(MRA)和青光眼概率评分(GPS)的判别能力。结果:与mra -高加索和mra -非裔美国人数据库相比,mra -印度数据库中被归类为“正常范围内”的患者比例明显更高(65%)。然而,对于GPS,这是使用非裔美国人数据库观察到的。对于MRA,高加索和非洲裔美国人数据库的敏感性最高(68%),而印度数据库的特异性最高(94%)。MRA-Caucasian、mra - african和MRA-Indian数据库区分青光眼和正常眼的AUC分别为0.77 (95% CI, 0.67-0.88)、0.79(0.69-0.89)和0.73(0.63-0.84)。对于GPS,使用高加索或印度数据库获得的灵敏度最高(68%)。非裔美国人数据库的特异性最高(98%)。GPS-Caucasian、GPS-African-American和GPS-Indian数据库的AUC分别为0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.87)、0.77(0.67-0.87)和0.76(0.66-0.87)。结论:3个民族数据库的比较显示早期青光眼与正常人的鉴别无显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of Ethnic-specific Databases in Heidelberg Retina Tomography-3 to Discriminate Between Early Glaucoma and Normal Chinese Eyes.

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of the 3 race-specific normative databases in Heidelberg Retina Tomography (HRT)-3, in differentiating between early glaucomatous and healthy normal Chinese eyes.

Method: 52 healthy volunteers and 25 glaucoma patients were recruited for this prospective cross-sectional study. All underwent standardized interviews, ophthalmic examination, perimetry and HRT optic disc imaging. Area under the curve (AUC) receiver operating characteristics, sensitivity and specificity were derived to assess the discriminating abilities of the 3 normative databases, for both Moorfields Regression Analysis (MRA) and Glaucoma Probability Score (GPS).

Results: A significantly higher percentage (65%) of patients were classified as "within normal limits" using the MRA-Indian database, as compared to the MRA-Caucasian and MRA-African-American databases. However, for GPS, this was observed using the African-American database. For MRA, the highest sensitivity was obtained with both Caucasian and African-American databases (68%), while the highest specificity was from the Indian database (94%). The AUC for discrimination between glaucomatous and normal eyes by MRA-Caucasian, MRA-African-American and MRA-Indian databases were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.67-0.88), 0.79 (0.69-0.89) and 0.73 (0.63-0.84) respectively. For GPS, the highest sensitivity was obtained using either Caucasian or Indian databases (68%). The highest specificity was seen with the African-American database (98%). The AUC for GPS-Caucasian, GPS-African-American and GPS-Indian databases were 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.87), 0.77 (0.67-0.87) and 0.76 (0.66-0.87) respectively.

Conclusion: Comparison of the 3 ethnic databases did not reveal significant differences to differentiate early glaucomatous from normal Chinese eyes.

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
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The Open Ophthalmology Journal is an Open Access online journal, which publishes research articles, reviews/mini-reviews, letters and guest edited single topic issues in all important areas of experimental and clinical research in ophthalmology, including use of ophthalmological therapies, devices and surgical techniques. The Open Ophthalmology Journal, a peer-reviewed journal, is an important and reliable source of current information on developments in the field. The emphasis will be on publishing quality papers rapidly and making them freely available to researchers worldwide.
期刊最新文献
A Narrative Review of Morquio Syndrome: Mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS) Type IV MGrx - A Novel Multi-modal Thermal Device for Treating Moderate to Severe Meibomian Gland Dysfunction and Dry Eye Determinants of Refractive Errors on School-going Children Attending Ophthalmic Clinic of AlMoosa Hospital in Saudi Arabia A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Convergence Insufficiency Prevalence and Management Options Photodynamic and Anti-VEGF Therapy for Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy - ‘Real World’ Outcomes in a Caucasian Population
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1