We fully agree with the sentiments raised; however, the study was performed as a retrospective audit so unfortunately this information is not available.
To determine the false negative rate one would require a formal prospective audit protocol of the GPwSI practice, with referral of a set number of ‘negative’ patients to the glaucoma specialist to confirm the lack of glaucoma. This was not financially viable in this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jones, L., Robinson, R. & Cook, N. Reply to Jones et al. Eye 21, 675 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.eye.6702678
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.eye.6702678