The Experts below are selected from a list of 138 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Chris A Johnson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
total deviation probability plots for stimulus size v perimetry
2016Co-Authors: Michael Wall, C F Brito, K R Woodward, Carrie K Doyle, Randy H Kardon, Chris A JohnsonAbstract:Conclusions: Size V full-threshold testing gives a similar number of abnormal test locations in patients with glaucoma compared with the size III Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm standard test. Size V testing, with its Greater Dynamic Range and lower variability, may be a viable alternative to size III testing in patients with glaucoma.
-
total deviation probability plots for stimulus size v perimetry a comparison with size iii stimuli
Archives of Ophthalmology, 2008Co-Authors: Michael Wall, C F Brito, K R Woodward, Carrie K Doyle, Randy H Kardon, Chris A JohnsonAbstract:Objective To compare empirical probability plots in patients with glaucoma for size V and III perimetry testing. Methods We computed empirical probability plot percentile limits after testing 60 age-matched controls tested with both size III (Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm) and size V (full threshold) perimetry twice. Probability plots of 120 patients with glaucoma tested in the same way were computed. We compared the number of abnormal test locations in the 2 stimulus sizes; we then compared these results with those from size III StatPac software (Zeiss Humphrey Systems, Dublin, California) using 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance. Results We found a similar number of abnormal test locations ( P ≤ .05) for the size III and size V testing conditions identified by the probability plots (no significant difference); there were significantly fewer abnormal locations using StatPac (size III) than from our size III database. When results were stratified by mean deviation, the mild visual loss group again did not show any significant differences between sizes III and V. Conclusions Size V full-threshold testing gives a similar number of abnormal test locations in patients with glaucoma compared with the size III Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm standard test. Size V testing, with its Greater Dynamic Range and lower variability, may be a viable alternative to size III testing in patients with glaucoma.
Michael Wall - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
total deviation probability plots for stimulus size v perimetry
2016Co-Authors: Michael Wall, C F Brito, K R Woodward, Carrie K Doyle, Randy H Kardon, Chris A JohnsonAbstract:Conclusions: Size V full-threshold testing gives a similar number of abnormal test locations in patients with glaucoma compared with the size III Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm standard test. Size V testing, with its Greater Dynamic Range and lower variability, may be a viable alternative to size III testing in patients with glaucoma.
-
total deviation probability plots for stimulus size v perimetry a comparison with size iii stimuli
Archives of Ophthalmology, 2008Co-Authors: Michael Wall, C F Brito, K R Woodward, Carrie K Doyle, Randy H Kardon, Chris A JohnsonAbstract:Objective To compare empirical probability plots in patients with glaucoma for size V and III perimetry testing. Methods We computed empirical probability plot percentile limits after testing 60 age-matched controls tested with both size III (Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm) and size V (full threshold) perimetry twice. Probability plots of 120 patients with glaucoma tested in the same way were computed. We compared the number of abnormal test locations in the 2 stimulus sizes; we then compared these results with those from size III StatPac software (Zeiss Humphrey Systems, Dublin, California) using 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance. Results We found a similar number of abnormal test locations ( P ≤ .05) for the size III and size V testing conditions identified by the probability plots (no significant difference); there were significantly fewer abnormal locations using StatPac (size III) than from our size III database. When results were stratified by mean deviation, the mild visual loss group again did not show any significant differences between sizes III and V. Conclusions Size V full-threshold testing gives a similar number of abnormal test locations in patients with glaucoma compared with the size III Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm standard test. Size V testing, with its Greater Dynamic Range and lower variability, may be a viable alternative to size III testing in patients with glaucoma.
Laura J. Esserman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Performance of Molecular Inversion Probes (MIP) in Allele Copy Number Determination
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2008Co-Authors: Yuker Wang, George Karlin-neumann, Martin Moorhead, Chunnuan Chen, Nicholas J. Wang, James S. Ireland, Steven Lin, Laura M. Heiser, Koei Chin, Laura J. EssermanAbstract:We have developed a new protocol for using Molecular Inversion Probes (MIP) to accurately and specifically measure allele copy number (ACN). The new protocol provides for significant improvements including the reduction of input DNA (from 2?g) by more than 25 fold (to 75ng total genomic DNA), higher overall precision resulting in one order of magnitude lower false positive rate, and Greater Dynamic Range with accurate absolute copy number up to 60 copies.
-
Analysis of molecular inversion probe performance for allele copy number determination
Genome biology, 2007Co-Authors: Yuker Wang, George Karlin-neumann, Martin Moorhead, Chunnuan Chen, Nicholas J. Wang, James S. Ireland, Steven Lin, Laura M. Heiser, Koei Chin, Laura J. EssermanAbstract:We have developed a new protocol for using molecular inversion probes to accurately and specifically measure allele copy number. The new protocol provides for significant improvements, including the reduction of input DNA (from 2 μg) by more than 25-fold (to 75 ng total genomic DNA), higher overall precision resulting in one order of magnitude lower false positive rate, and Greater Dynamic Range with accurate absolute copy number up to 60 copies.
C F Brito - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
total deviation probability plots for stimulus size v perimetry
2016Co-Authors: Michael Wall, C F Brito, K R Woodward, Carrie K Doyle, Randy H Kardon, Chris A JohnsonAbstract:Conclusions: Size V full-threshold testing gives a similar number of abnormal test locations in patients with glaucoma compared with the size III Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm standard test. Size V testing, with its Greater Dynamic Range and lower variability, may be a viable alternative to size III testing in patients with glaucoma.
-
total deviation probability plots for stimulus size v perimetry a comparison with size iii stimuli
Archives of Ophthalmology, 2008Co-Authors: Michael Wall, C F Brito, K R Woodward, Carrie K Doyle, Randy H Kardon, Chris A JohnsonAbstract:Objective To compare empirical probability plots in patients with glaucoma for size V and III perimetry testing. Methods We computed empirical probability plot percentile limits after testing 60 age-matched controls tested with both size III (Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm) and size V (full threshold) perimetry twice. Probability plots of 120 patients with glaucoma tested in the same way were computed. We compared the number of abnormal test locations in the 2 stimulus sizes; we then compared these results with those from size III StatPac software (Zeiss Humphrey Systems, Dublin, California) using 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance. Results We found a similar number of abnormal test locations ( P ≤ .05) for the size III and size V testing conditions identified by the probability plots (no significant difference); there were significantly fewer abnormal locations using StatPac (size III) than from our size III database. When results were stratified by mean deviation, the mild visual loss group again did not show any significant differences between sizes III and V. Conclusions Size V full-threshold testing gives a similar number of abnormal test locations in patients with glaucoma compared with the size III Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm standard test. Size V testing, with its Greater Dynamic Range and lower variability, may be a viable alternative to size III testing in patients with glaucoma.
Carrie K Doyle - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
total deviation probability plots for stimulus size v perimetry
2016Co-Authors: Michael Wall, C F Brito, K R Woodward, Carrie K Doyle, Randy H Kardon, Chris A JohnsonAbstract:Conclusions: Size V full-threshold testing gives a similar number of abnormal test locations in patients with glaucoma compared with the size III Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm standard test. Size V testing, with its Greater Dynamic Range and lower variability, may be a viable alternative to size III testing in patients with glaucoma.
-
total deviation probability plots for stimulus size v perimetry a comparison with size iii stimuli
Archives of Ophthalmology, 2008Co-Authors: Michael Wall, C F Brito, K R Woodward, Carrie K Doyle, Randy H Kardon, Chris A JohnsonAbstract:Objective To compare empirical probability plots in patients with glaucoma for size V and III perimetry testing. Methods We computed empirical probability plot percentile limits after testing 60 age-matched controls tested with both size III (Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm) and size V (full threshold) perimetry twice. Probability plots of 120 patients with glaucoma tested in the same way were computed. We compared the number of abnormal test locations in the 2 stimulus sizes; we then compared these results with those from size III StatPac software (Zeiss Humphrey Systems, Dublin, California) using 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance. Results We found a similar number of abnormal test locations ( P ≤ .05) for the size III and size V testing conditions identified by the probability plots (no significant difference); there were significantly fewer abnormal locations using StatPac (size III) than from our size III database. When results were stratified by mean deviation, the mild visual loss group again did not show any significant differences between sizes III and V. Conclusions Size V full-threshold testing gives a similar number of abnormal test locations in patients with glaucoma compared with the size III Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm standard test. Size V testing, with its Greater Dynamic Range and lower variability, may be a viable alternative to size III testing in patients with glaucoma.
