• My Dashboard My Education Find an Ophthalmologist
  • Home
  • For Ophthalmologists
    • Meetings
      • AAO 2021
        • Meeting Information
          • Past and Future Meetings
          • Contact Information
          • Virtual Meeting Guide
          • Policies and Disclaimers
        • Program
          • Program Search
          • Program Highlights
          • Program Committees
          • CME
          • Meeting Archives
        • Expo
        • Registration
        • Hotels & Travel
          • Hotel Reservation Information
          • New Orleans
          • International Attendees
          • Hotel Meeting Space
        • Presenter Central
          • Presenter Central
          • Abstract Selection Process
          • Submission Policies
          • Subject Classification/Topics
          • Instruction Courses and Skills Transfer Labs
          • Papers and Posters
          • Videos
          • Grand Rounds Symposium
          • Program Participant and Faculty Guidelines
          • Faculty Development Program
        • Exhibitors
          • Exhibitor Central
          • Exhibitor Portal Information
          • New Exhibiting Companies
          • Exhibitor Resources
      • Mid-Year Forum
        • Registration and Travel
        • Congressional Advocacy Day
        • Advocacy Ambassador Program
        • Program
        • Schedule
        • Sponsored Attendees
        • News
      • Ophthalmology Business Summit
      • Codequest
        • Codequest Instructors
        • Claim Codequest CME or CEU Credit
      • Eyecelerator
    • Clinical Education
      • COVID-19
      • Education
        • Browse All Education
        • Courses
        • Cases
        • Learning Plans
        • Interactive
        • Focal Points
        • Wills Eye Manual
        • Disease Reviews
        • Clinical Webinars
        • Diagnose This
        • Self-Assessments
        • Educational Centers
          • Glaucoma Education Center
          • Pediatric Ophthalmology Education Center
          • Laser Surgery Education Center
          • Myopia Resources
          • Oculofacial Plastic Surgery Center
          • Redmond Ethics Center
      • Journals
      • Guidelines
        • Browse All Practice Guidelines
        • Preferred Practice Patterns
        • Clinical Statements
        • Compendium Guidelines
        • Complementary Therapy Assessments
        • Medical Information Technology
        • Ophthalmic Technology Assessments
        • Patient Safety Statements
        • Choosing Wisely
        • Low Vision
        • Eye Care for Older Adults
        • Eye Disease Statistics
        • About the Hoskins Center
      • Multimedia Library
        • Browse All Videos and Audio
        • Clinical and Surgical Videos
        • Presentations and Lectures
        • 1-Minute Videos
        • Master Class Videos
        • Basic Skills Videos
        • Interviews
        • Audio and Podcasts
        • Images
        • Submit an Image
        • Submit a Video
      • News
        • Browse All Clinical News
        • Editors' Choice
        • Headlines
        • Current Insight
      • CME Central
        • Browse All CME Activities
        • Claim CME Credit and View Transcript
        • CME Planning Resources
        • Complete Your Financial Disclosure
        • Joint Sponsorship Portal
        • LEO Continuing Education Recognition Award
        • Safe ER/LA Opioid Prescribing
        • Check Your Industry Payment Records
      • MOC
      • Resident Education
        • All Resident Education
        • OKAP and Board Exam Resources
          • OKAP Exam
          • Board Prep Resources
          • OKAP and Board Review Presentations
          • Study Flashcards
        • Resident Courses
        • Resident Videos
        • Cataract Master
        • Simulation in Resident Education
        • Pediatric Ophthalmology Education Center
        • News and Advice from YO Info
    • Membership
      • Join
      • Renew
      • Current Member
      • Volunteer
      • Physician Wellness
      • Member Directory
      • Member Obituaries
      • AAOE Membership
    • Advocacy
      • Advocacy News
      • Get Involved
        • Ways to Give
        • How to Get Involved
        • Congressional Advocacy
        • Support the Academy's Agenda
        • Research Legislation
        • Find Your Legislators
        • I Am an Advocate
        • Advocacy at Home
        • Advocate Tools
        • Best Practices for Advocating at Home
        • Social Media Toolkit
        • Letter to Editor
        • Town Hall Guide
        • Guide to Engaging With New Lawmakers
        • Resources
        • Attending a Political Fundraiser
      • OPHTHPAC
        • About Us
        • Join OPHTHPAC
        • OPHTHPAC Blog
      • Surgical Scope Fund
        • Support Surgery By Surgeons
        • Surgery By Surgeons Blog
    • Publications
      • EyeNet Magazine
        • Latest Issue
        • Archive
        • Subscribe
        • Advertise
        • Write For Us
        • Corporate Lunches
        • Contact
        • MIPS 2019
        • MIPS 2020
      • Focal Points
      • Ophthalmology
      • Ophthalmology Glaucoma
      • Ophthalmology Retina
      • YO Info
      • Scope
    • Subspecialties
      • Cataract/Anterior Segment
      • Comprehensive Ophthalmology
      • Cornea/External Disease
      • Glaucoma
      • Neuro-Ophthalmology/Orbit
      • Ocular Pathology/Oncology
      • Oculoplastics/Orbit
      • Pediatric Ophthalmology/Strabismus
      • Refractive Management/Intervention
      • Retina/Vitreous
      • Uveitis
    • IRIS Registry
      • About
      • Using the Registry
        • User Guide
        • Medicare Reporting
        • Maintenance of Certification
        • Non-EHR Reporting
      • Sign Up
        • Application Process
        • Why Participate
        • Once You've Applied: Getting Started
        • What Practices Are Saying About the Registry
      • Requirements
        • EHR Systems
        • Data & Technical Needs
      • Research
      • Registry Dashboard
      • News
    • Medicare Information
  • For Practice Management
    • Coding
      • Codequest
      • Ask the Coding Experts
      • Coding Updates and Resources
      • Coding for Injectable Drugs
      • ICD-10-CM
        • News and Advice
      • Ophthalmic Coding Specialist (OCS) Exam
    • Regulatory
      • Medicare Participation Options
      • Audits
      • Medicare Advantage Plans
        • Termination Appeal Letter
      • New Medicare Card
      • Provider Enrollment, Chain and Ownership System (PECOS)
      • HIPAA Resources
    • Practice Operations
      • Practice Management Advice
      • Lean Management
      • Cybersecurity
      • Private Equity
      • EHRs
        • Overview
        • Planning and Preparation
        • Vendor Selection
        • Implementation and Evaluation
        • Patient Portals
        • Resources
        • Ratings
    • Events
      • Annual Meeting
      • Business Summit
      • Codequest Courses
    • Leadership
      • AAOE Board of Directors
      • Leadership Program (OPAL)
    • Listservs
    • Resources
      • Practice Management Resource Library
      • Coronavirus Resources
      • Patient Education
      • Practice Forms Library
        • Practice Forms Library - Examination
        • Practice Forms Library - Financial
        • Practice Forms Library - HIPAA
        • Practice Forms Library - Human Resources
        • Practice Forms Library - Job Descriptions
        • Practice Forms Library - Patient Forms
        • Practice Forms Library - Protocols
        • Practice Forms Library - Surgery
      • Practice Analytics
        • Benchmarking Tool
        • Salary Survey
      • Consultant Directory
      • Ophthalmology Job Center
      • Practice Management for Retina
      • Reopening and Recovery
    • Get Involved
    • Medicare
      • Quality
        • Overview
        • Reporting
        • Measures
      • Promoting Interoperability
        • Overview
        • Measures
        • Attestation
        • Hardships and Exceptions
        • Audits
        • News and Advice
      • Improvement Activities
        • Overview
        • List of Improvement Activities
        • Attestation
        • Audits
      • Cost
      • Avoid a Penalty
      • Resources
        • 2019 to 2020 MIPS Changes
        • MIPS Solo and Small Practice Survival Guide
        • MIPS Glossary
        • MIPS Resources on EyeNet
        • MIPS Extreme Hardship Exceptions
        • Solo and Small-Practice Roadmap
        • MIPS Manual
        • MIPS Large Practice Roadmap
        • IRIS Registry User Guide
        • CMS Websites
        • 2020 MIPS Payments: Understanding Remittance Advice Codes
        • Final Checklist for EHR/Non-EHR 2019 MIPS Reporting
        • MIPS Tips
        • MIPS Archive
    • Membership
  • For Public & Patients
    • Eye Health A-Z
    • Symptoms
    • Glasses & Contacts
    • Tips & Prevention
    • News
    • Ask an Ophthalmologist
    • Patient Stories
    • No Cost Eye Exams
    • Español
      • A - Z de Salud Ocular
      • Síntomas
      • Anteojos y Lentes de Contacto
      • Consejos y Prevención
      • Noticias
      • Relatos de Pacientes
      • Exámenes de la vista sin costo
      • English
  • AAO 2021
    • Meeting Information
      • Past and Future Meetings
      • Contact Information
      • Virtual Meeting Help
      • Virtual Meeting Guide
      • Policies and Disclaimers
    • Program
      • Program Search
      • Program Highlights
      • Program Committees
      • CME
      • Meeting Archives
    • Expo
    • Registration
    • Hotels & Travel
      • Hotel Reservation Information
      • New Orleans
      • International Attendees
      • Hotel Meeting Space
    • Presenter Central
      • Presenter Central
      • Abstract Selection Process
      • Submission Policies
      • Subject Classification/Topics
      • Instruction Courses and Skills Transfer Labs
      • Papers and Posters
      • Videos
      • Grand Rounds Symposium
      • Program Participant and Faculty Guidelines
      • Faculty Development Program
    • Exhibitors
      • Exhibitor Central
      • Exhibitor Portal Information
      • New Exhibiting Companies
      • Exhibitor Resources
  • About
    • Who We Are
      • What We Do
      • About Ophthalmology
      • The Eye Care Team
      • Ethics and the Academy
      • History
      • Museum of Vision
      • Values
    • Governance
      • Council
      • Board of Trustees
      • Committees
      • Academy Past Presidents
      • Secretariats
      • Elections
      • Academy Blog
      • Academy Staff Leadership
    • Leadership Development
    • Awards
      • Laureate Recognition Award
      • Outstanding Advocate Award
      • Outstanding Humanitarian Service Award
      • International Blindness Prevention Award
      • Distinguished Service Award
      • Guests of Honor
      • Secretariat Award
      • Straatsma Award
      • Achievement Award Program
      • Artemis Award
      • EnergEYES Award
      • International Education Award
      • International Scholar Award
      • Commitment to Advocacy Award
      • Visionary Society Award
    • Financial Relationships
    • Policy Statements
    • Related Organizations
      • Subspecialty/Specialized Interest Society Directory
      • State Society Directory
      • Subspecialty/Specialized Interest Society Meetings
      • State Society Meetings
      • Resources for Societies
    • Year in Review
      • 2019 Year in Review
  • Foundation
    • About
      • Funding Allocations and Sources
      • 2019-2020 Annual Report
      • Annual Report Archives
      • News From the Chair
      • Foundation Staff
    • Our Impact
      • Partners for Sight
      • Donor Spotlights
      • Global Ophthalmic Community
      • Sponsorships
      • Patients and the Public
    • Giving Options
      • Our Supporters
      • Estate and Planned Giving
      • Ophthalmic Business Council
    • Orbital Gala
      • Why Attend
      • Photo Recap
      • Corporate Support Opportunities
      • Tribute Gifts
      • Silent Auction
      • Corporate Sponsors
    • Donate
    • Museum of the Eye Campaign
      • Museum Supporters
  • Museum of the Eye
    • Visit
    • Events
    • Explore
      • Research and Resources
      • Collection Search
      • Previous Exhibits
      • Oral Histories
      • Biographies
    • Volunteer
    • Mailing List
    • Donate
    • About the Museum
      • Museum Blog
  • Young Ophthalmologists
    • YO Info
    • Learn to Bill
    • Engage with the Academy
  • Senior Ophthalmologists
    • Scope
    • Practice Transitions
  • International Ophthalmologists
    • Global Programs and Resources for National Societies
    • Awards
    • Global Outreach
  • Residents
  • Medical Students
×
Log In Create an Account
  • For Ophthalmologists
  • For Practice Management
  • For Public & Patients
  • About
  • Foundation
  • Museum of the Eye
  • COVID-19
  • Journals
  • Education
    • Education
    • Courses
    • Cases
    • Learning Plans
    • Interactive
    • Focal Points
    • Wills Eye Manual
    • Disease Reviews
    • Clinical Webinars
    • Diagnose This
    • Self-Assessments
    • Education Centers
      • Glaucoma Education Center
      • Pediatric Ophthalmology Education Center
      • Laser Surgery Education Center
      • Oculofacial Plastic Surgery Center
      • Redmond Ethics Center
      • Myopia Resources
  • Guidelines
    • Practice Guidelines
    • Preferred Practice Patterns
    • Clinical Statements
    • Ophthalmic Technology Assessments
    • Patient Safety Statements
    • Complementary Therapy Assessments
    • Compendium Guidelines
    • Medical Information Technology
    • Low Vision
    • Choosing Wisely
    • Eye Care for Older Adults
    • Eye Disease Statistics
    • About the Hoskins Center
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • Premium IOLs
  • Multimedia
    • Multimedia Library
    • Video
      • 1-Minute Videos
      • Presentations and Lectures
      • Master Class Videos
      • Basic Skills Videos
      • Clinical and Surgical Videos
      • Interviews
      • Resident Lectures
      • Submit a Video
    • Audio and Podcasts
    • Images
      • Submit an Image
  • News
    • Clinical News
    • Editors' Choice
    • Headlines
    • Current Insight
  • CME
    • CME Central
    • Claim CME Credit and View Transcript
    • CME Planning Resources
    • Complete Your Financial Disclosure
    • Joint Sponsorship Portal
    • LEO Continuing Education Recognition Award
    • Safe ER/LA Opioid Prescribing
    • Check Your Industry Payment Records
  • MOC
  • Residents
    • Resident Education
    • OKAP and Board Exam Resources
      • OKAP Exam
      • Board Prep Resources
      • OKAP and Board Review Presentations
      • Study Flashcards
    • Resident Courses
    • Resident Videos
    • Cataract Master
    • Simulation in Resident Education
    • Diversity and Inclusion Education
    • Pediatric Ophthalmology Education Center
    • News and Advice from YO Info
    • Clinical Education /
    • Book Excerpts /
    • Basic and Clinical Science Course - Excerpt
  • 2020–2021 BCSC Basic and Clinical Science Course™

    Go to Academy Store Learn more and Purchase.

    1 Update on General Medicine

    Chapter 1: Using Research to Improve Clinical Practice

    Interpreting Diagnostic and Screening Tests

    Complicating Features

    Using ROC curves to compare different screening thresholds with a continuous predictive variable

    When the screening test measures a continuous value, such as IOP, it becomes more complicated to evaluate the screening test. Figure 1-5 uses data from the Baltimore Eye Survey to graphically display sensitivity and specificity for each value of IOP. The usual cutoff for normal IOP, 21 mm Hg, has a sensitivity of 49% and a specificity of 90%. The intersection of sensitivity and specificity is the optimal threshold for maximum sensitivity and specificity in a screening test. This intersection occurs at 18 mm Hg, where the sensitivity is 65% and the specificity is 66%. With continuous variables, like IOP, there is a trade-off between sensitivity and specificity: a higher sensitivity results in a lower specificity, and vice versa.

    Figure 1-5 Sensitivity and specificity of an intraocular pressure (IOP) cutoff as a screening tool for glaucoma. For each IOP level (along the x-axis), the values for sensitivity and specificity are plotted. This demonstrates that with a higher level of IOP as a screening cutoff for glaucoma (for example, IOP >30 mm Hg), the sensitivity decreases and the specificity increases.

    (Used with permission from Tielsch JM, Katz J, Singh K, et al. A population-based evaluation of glaucoma screening: the Baltimore Eye Survey. Am J Epidemiol. 1991;134[10]:1102–1110.)

    Figure 1-6 depicts another graphical representation of sensitivity and specificity called a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. By convention, an ROC curve plots sensitivity on the y-axis and (1 – specificity) on the x-axis. The larger the area under the curve, the more diagnostically precise is the screening test. The line with the diamond-shaped symbols represents a hypothetical screening test with optimal results; the line with the triangles represents a poor screening test with an ROC area of only 50%; and the line with the circles—the middle curve—represents the Baltimore Eye Survey data used in Figure 1-5. An ROC curve can inform selection of an optimal cutoff point for a screening test by identifying the sensitivity–specificity pair located closest to the upper left of the ROC plot.

    Overall, these figures demonstrate that IOP measurement is not a very good screening tool for glaucoma because no cut-off reaches the ideal sensitivity/specificity (upper left of diamond line). Other significant factors in choosing a cutoff point for a screening test are the population to be screened and the relative importance of sensitivity and specificity. If the consequence of missing a diagnosis is very important such as blindness, an investigator may choose a test with high sensitivity but poor specificity. For example, a low cutoff for erythrocyte sedimentation rate might be chosen for a person who has recent vision loss and who is suspected of having giant cell arteritis.

    • Tielsch JM, Katz J, Singh K, et al. A population-based evaluation of glaucoma screening: the Baltimore Eye Survey. Am J Epidemiol. 1991;134(10):1102–1110.

    Figure 1-6 ROC curve of IOP as a screening tool for glaucoma with sensitivity on the y-axis and (1 − specificity) on the x-axis. The middle line replots the data from Figure 1-5, showing all combinations of IOP. Two boxes identify the diagnostic precision of IOP ≥18 mm Hg and IOP ≥21 mm Hg. The other lines represent an optimal (upper line) and a useless (lower line) screening test, respectively.

    (Produced with data from Tielsch JM, Katz J, Singh K, et al. A population-based evaluation of glaucoma screening: the Baltimore Eye Survey. Am J Epidemiol. 1991;134[10]:1102–1110.)

    Using ROC curves to compare different screening devices

    Studies can use ROC curves to compare new diagnostic tests. ROC curves can be used to compare tests that use different units or different scales. Figure 1-7 shows 3 ROC curves illustrating the ability of 3 glaucoma imaging devices to discriminate between healthy eyes and eyes with glaucomatous visual field loss via imaging of the optic nerve head and nerve fiber layer. The area under each ROC curve represents a summary measure of the relative efficacy of the screening test. The ROC curves appear similar for inferior average nerve fiber layer thickness as measured with OCT and for scanning laser polarimetry with variable corneal compensation (GDx VCC nerve fiber index), while the ROC curve for confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (HRT linear discriminant function) is lower. In other words, the figure suggests a higher diagnostic precision for scanning laser polarimetry and OCT than confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy.

    • Medeiros FA, Zangwill LM, Bowd C, Weinreb RN. Comparison of the GDx VCC scanning laser polarimeter, HRT II confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope, and Stratus OCT optical coherence tomograph for the detection of glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122(6):827–837.

    The effect of pretest probability of disease

    Pretest probability of disease uses knowledge of the patient before any screening or diagnostic tests are performed. For example, the investigator may know that the patient has a first-degree relative with glaucoma as well as a thinner-than-average central corneal thickness (both are risk factors for glaucoma). This information suggests a pretest probability of glaucoma about 3 times higher than that of a person picked at random from the general population. How much does a diagnostic test improve the ability to diagnose glaucoma in this patient with a higher pretest probability? How much higher is the relative risk of glaucoma if the test result is positive?

    Figure 1-7 ROC curve of 3 glaucoma imaging devices. The single parameter chosen for display for each instrument was the one that performed the best in the authors’ study. There was no statistically significant difference in the area under the ROC curves for these 3 parameters.

    (The HRT linear discriminant function is from a paper by Bathija et al, referenced by Medeiros et al; the GDx and OCT parameters are standard test outputs provided by the manufacturers. Graph drawn with data from Medeiros FA, Zangwill LM, Bowd C, Weinreb RN. Comparison of the GDx VCC scanning laser polarimeter, HRT II confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope, and Stratus OCT optical coherence tomograph for the detection of glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122[6]:827–837.)

    Bayes theorem allows the pretest probability of disease to be combined with the diagnostic precision of a screening test to produce a posttest probability of disease. To use this theorem, the likelihood ratio must be calculated. The likelihood ratio of a positive test is the sensitivity divided by (1 − specificity). For a sample test with 80% sensitivity and 90% specificity (0.8/[1 − 0.9]), the positive likelihood ratio is 8. The likelihood ratio of a negative test is (1 − sensitivity) divided by the specificity. For the same sample test, the negative likelihood ratio is (1 − 0.8)/0.9, or 0.22. Positive likelihood ratios start at 1 and continue to infinity—the bigger, the better. Negative likelihood ratios range from 0 to 1—the smaller, the better. If the goal is to diagnose disease, the test with the larger positive likelihood ratio is the better test; conversely, if the goal is to rule out disease, the test with the smaller negative likelihood ratio is better.

    If the positive likelihood ratio is multiplied by the pretest probability of disease, the result is the posttest probability of disease. Thus, for the example patient with the positive family history, thin cornea, and pretest probability of 3, a positive test with a positive likelihood ratio of 8 will result in a posttest probability of glaucoma that is 24 times that of a person drawn at random from the population.

    Table 1-3 Changes in PPV and NPV Depending on Pretest Probability in a Test With 80% Sensitivity, 90% Specificity

    Table 1-3 demonstrates another important consideration regarding pretest probability of disease. Consider the case of a 65-year-old woman with no risk factors for glaucoma and a pretest probability of disease of 1.0%. A positive test result for glaucoma would raise her probability of disease to 7.5%. Most patients with a positive test result would not actually have the disease! Similarly, an 85-year-old man with a strong positive family history, thin central corneal thickness, and an IOP of 30 mm Hg might have a pretest probability of disease of 50.0%. If his test result were negative, he would still have a posttest probability of disease of 18.2%, greater than that of the 65-year-old woman! This example illustrates the importance of considering the pretest probability of disease in deciding whether to employ a diagnostic test. In general, screening tests do not perform well when the prevalence of disease is low.

    Intermediate diagnostic categories, such as “glaucoma suspect,” are often encountered in clinical practice. Sensitivity–specificity and ROC curves cannot account for such categories, because they require borderline subjects to be categorized as either having the disease (eg, glaucoma) or not having it (eg, no glaucoma). However, a likelihood ratio can be calculated for a borderline category, which reflects the risk of patients exhibiting that characteristic (eg, “glaucoma suspect”).

    Use of tests in combination

    Studies can combine tests in series or in parallel. An example of combining 2 tests in series is when a clinician performs the second test only if the first is positive. The correlation between the 2 tests must be considered when they are used in series. Consider the following case: a study uses cup–disc ratio, determined via optic nerve head photography, as a diagnostic test. If the result is positive, the peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer thickness observed on OCT imaging is used to confirm the diagnosis. The study provides likelihood ratios for each test. Although it may be tempting to use the product of the 2 likelihood ratios and the pretest probability to calculate a posttest probability, if the screening tests are correlated with one another the predictive ability will appear artificially higher. Because cup–disc ratio and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness both examine tissues of the optic nerve head, albeit using different technologies, they are highly correlated. Thus, because the 2 tests are not independent, the results from the performance of the 2-test strategy are likely to be different from the posttest probability calculated from the product of the 2 likelihood ratios and the pretest probability.

    Other studies have combined tests in parallel, considering the result positive if either test result is positive. This strategy works best when the tests have good specificity (combining tests this way makes overall specificity deteriorate) and address different aspects of a disease. Kopplin and colleagues found that a visual acuity of less than 20/40, abnormal/poor-quality nonmydriatic imaging, abnormal frequency doubling perimetry, or abnormal/poor-quality confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy resulted in an ROC curve area of 0.827 for detection of visually significant eye disease (eg, cataract, macular degeneration, glaucoma).

    • Kopplin LJ, Mansberger SL. Predictive value of screening tests for visually significant eye disease. Am J Ophthalmol. 2015;160(3):538–546.e3.

    Clinical acceptance and ethics of testing

    Clinicians should avoid tests that provide a small increment in the likelihood ratio of detecting disease or that are expensive or painful. Also, all tests carry some burden, including the potential for adverse effects (eg, corneal abrasion from tonometry), psychological fear of a disease (eg, related to a screening test for glaucoma), and additional testing and follow-up examinations for abnormal or unusual results. A clinician should avoid a test if it will not change patient management. Similarly, screening for eye disease should include a process for follow-up of those who have abnormal results, regardless of their insurance status. Screening provides little value to participants who are told they might have a disease but are given no method of obtaining a follow-up evaluation or treatment.

    Generalizability

    Most studies investigate new screening or diagnostic tests in a clinical setting before evaluating them in a population-based sample (largely because of the high cost of performing population-based research). Clinicians should consider whether the data for a new test will apply to their screening population. Even a clinic-based study may not have patients like those in another practice. For example, a study may include only young glaucoma patients without other eye diseases, such as macular degeneration. This leads to excellent sensitivity and specificity, but the results may differ in a sample of patients who have borderline glaucoma and are older.

    Excerpted from BCSC 2020-2021 series: Section 1 - Update on General Medicine. For more information and to purchase the entire series, please visit https://www.aao.org/bcsc.

  • Most Commented
    Loading, please wait...
    There are no comments available.
    Most Viewed
    Loading, please wait...
    Most Viewed content is not available.
  • The Academy Store
    2021 North Carolina Codequest (Recording)
    2021 Tennessee Codequest (Recording)
    2021 Multistate Codequest (Recorded Feb. 5)
    2021 Michigan Codequest (Recording)
    Focal Points 2020 Complete Set
    2021 Coding Coach: Complete Ophthalmic Coding Reference 
    2021 CPT: Complete Pocket Ophthalmic Reference
    2021 Retina Coding: Complete Reference Guide
    2021 Fundamentals of Ophthalmic Coding
    2021 CPT Professional Edition 
    2021 HCPCS Level ll Professional Edition
    2021 Coding Assistant: Cataract and Anterior Segment
    2021 Coding Assistant: Cornea
    2021 Coding Assistant: Glaucoma
    2021 Coding Assistant: Oculofacial
    2021 Coding Assistant: Pediatrics/Strabismus
    2021 Coding Assistant for Subspecialties 
    Recorded Webinar: 2021 Ophthalmology Coding Update
    Webinar: 2021 Ophthalmology Coding Update
    Ophthalmology Journal
    Ophthalmology Retina Journal
    Focal Points Member Benefit
    2021 ICD-10-CM for Ophthalmology: The Complete Reference 
    Conquering New E-M Documentation Guidelines for Ophthalmology
    2020-2021 Basic and Clinical Science Course Complete Set
    2020-2021 Basic and Clinical Science Course Residency Set
    2020-2021 Basic and Clinical Science Course, Section 01: Update on General Medicine
    2020-2021 Basic and Clinical Science Course, Section 02: Fundamentals and Principles of Ophthalmology
    2020-2021 Basic and Clinical Science Course, Section 03: Clinical Optics
    2020-2021 Basic and Clinical Science Course, Section 04: Ophthalmic Pathology and Intraocular Tumors
 
  • Contact Us
  • About the Academy
  • Jobs at the Academy
  • Financial Relationships with Industry
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Help
  • For Advertisers
  • For Media
  • Ophthalmology Job Center

OUR SITES

  • EyeWiki
  • International Society of Refractive Surgery

FOLLOW THE ACADEMY

Medical Professionals

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube

Public & Patients

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • YouTube

Museum of the Eye

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Trip Advisor
  • Yelp
© American Academy of Ophthalmology 2021