Cargando…

Reference ranges for clinical electrophysiology of vision

INTRODUCTION: Establishing robust reference intervals for clinical procedures has received much attention from international clinical laboratories, with approved guidelines. Physiological measurement laboratories have given this topic less attention; however, most of the principles are transferable....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Davis, C. Quentin, Hamilton, Ruth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8494724/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33880667
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10633-021-09831-1
_version_ 1784579376976756736
author Davis, C. Quentin
Hamilton, Ruth
author_facet Davis, C. Quentin
Hamilton, Ruth
author_sort Davis, C. Quentin
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Establishing robust reference intervals for clinical procedures has received much attention from international clinical laboratories, with approved guidelines. Physiological measurement laboratories have given this topic less attention; however, most of the principles are transferable. METHODS: Herein, we summarise those principles and expand them to cover bilateral measurements and one-tailed reference intervals, which are common issues for those interpreting clinical visual electrophysiology tests such as electroretinograms (ERGs), visual evoked potentials (VEPs) and electrooculograms (EOGs). RESULTS: The gold standard process of establishing and defining reference intervals, which are adequately reliable, entails collecting data from a minimum of 120 suitable reference individuals for each partition (e.g. sex, age) and defining limits with nonparametric methods. Parametric techniques may be used under some conditions. A brief outline of methods for defining reference limits from patient data (indirect sampling) is given. Reference intervals established elsewhere, or with older protocols, can be transferred or verified with as few as 40 and 20 suitable reference individuals, respectively. Consideration is given to small numbers of reference subjects, interpretation of serial measurements using subject-based reference values, multidimensional reference regions and age-dependent reference values. Bilateral measurements, despite their correlation, can be used to improve reference intervals although additional care is required in computing the confidence in the reference interval or the reference interval itself when bilateral measurements are only available from some of subjects. DISCUSSION: Good quality reference limits minimise false-positive and false-negative results, thereby maximising the clinical utility and patient benefit. Quality indicators include using appropriately sized reference datasets with appropriate numerical handling for reporting; using subject-based reference limits where appropriate; and limiting tests for each patient to only those which are clinically indicated, independent and highly discriminating. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10633-021-09831-1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8494724
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84947242021-10-19 Reference ranges for clinical electrophysiology of vision Davis, C. Quentin Hamilton, Ruth Doc Ophthalmol Original Research Article INTRODUCTION: Establishing robust reference intervals for clinical procedures has received much attention from international clinical laboratories, with approved guidelines. Physiological measurement laboratories have given this topic less attention; however, most of the principles are transferable. METHODS: Herein, we summarise those principles and expand them to cover bilateral measurements and one-tailed reference intervals, which are common issues for those interpreting clinical visual electrophysiology tests such as electroretinograms (ERGs), visual evoked potentials (VEPs) and electrooculograms (EOGs). RESULTS: The gold standard process of establishing and defining reference intervals, which are adequately reliable, entails collecting data from a minimum of 120 suitable reference individuals for each partition (e.g. sex, age) and defining limits with nonparametric methods. Parametric techniques may be used under some conditions. A brief outline of methods for defining reference limits from patient data (indirect sampling) is given. Reference intervals established elsewhere, or with older protocols, can be transferred or verified with as few as 40 and 20 suitable reference individuals, respectively. Consideration is given to small numbers of reference subjects, interpretation of serial measurements using subject-based reference values, multidimensional reference regions and age-dependent reference values. Bilateral measurements, despite their correlation, can be used to improve reference intervals although additional care is required in computing the confidence in the reference interval or the reference interval itself when bilateral measurements are only available from some of subjects. DISCUSSION: Good quality reference limits minimise false-positive and false-negative results, thereby maximising the clinical utility and patient benefit. Quality indicators include using appropriately sized reference datasets with appropriate numerical handling for reporting; using subject-based reference limits where appropriate; and limiting tests for each patient to only those which are clinically indicated, independent and highly discriminating. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10633-021-09831-1. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-04-21 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8494724/ /pubmed/33880667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10633-021-09831-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Davis, C. Quentin
Hamilton, Ruth
Reference ranges for clinical electrophysiology of vision
title Reference ranges for clinical electrophysiology of vision
title_full Reference ranges for clinical electrophysiology of vision
title_fullStr Reference ranges for clinical electrophysiology of vision
title_full_unstemmed Reference ranges for clinical electrophysiology of vision
title_short Reference ranges for clinical electrophysiology of vision
title_sort reference ranges for clinical electrophysiology of vision
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8494724/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33880667
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10633-021-09831-1
work_keys_str_mv AT daviscquentin referencerangesforclinicalelectrophysiologyofvision
AT hamiltonruth referencerangesforclinicalelectrophysiologyofvision