251 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10529927)
1. Kinetic and static fixation methods in automated threshold perimetry.
Asman P; Fingeret M; Robin A; Wild J; Pacey I; Greenfield D; Liebmann J; Ritch R
J Glaucoma; 1999 Oct; 8(5):290-6. PubMed ID: 10529927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. [The significance of static quantitative threshold perimetry and the barring of blind spot in kinetic quantitative perimetry in chronic open angle glaucoma].
Ge JA
Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 1989 Mar; 25(2):70-4. PubMed ID: 2507255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Comparison of SKP (semi-automated kinetic perimetry) and SASP (suprathreshold automated static perimetry) techniques in patients with advanced glaucoma].
Nowomiejska K; Paetzold J; Krapp E; Rejdak R; Zagórski Z; Schiefer U
Klin Oczna; 2004; 106(1-2 Suppl):231-3. PubMed ID: 15510509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Visual-field defects in well-defined retinal lesions using Humphrey and Dicon perimeters.
Bass SJ; Feldman J
Optometry; 2000 Oct; 71(10):643-52. PubMed ID: 11063269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The ability of Medmont M600 automated perimetry to detect threats to fixation.
Zhang L; Drance SM; Douglas GR
J Glaucoma; 1997 Aug; 6(4):259-62. PubMed ID: 9264306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Humphrey matrix frequency doubling perimetry for detection of visual-field defects in open-angle glaucoma.
Clement CI; Goldberg I; Healey PR; Graham S
Br J Ophthalmol; 2009 May; 93(5):582-8. PubMed ID: 18669543
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison between GDx VCC parameter and achromatic perimetry in glaucoma patients.
Iester M; Perdicchi A; De Feo F; Fiesoletti E; Amodeo S; Sanna G; Leonardi A; Calabria G
J Glaucoma; 2006 Aug; 15(4):281-5. PubMed ID: 16865003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Visual field assessment in glaucoma: comparative evaluation of manual kinetic Goldmann perimetry and automated static perimetry.
Agarwal HC; Gulati V; Sihota R
Indian J Ophthalmol; 2000 Dec; 48(4):301-6. PubMed ID: 11340889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Application of octopus 101 GKP kinetic and static automated perimetry in the diagnosis of the primary open angle glaucoma].
Zhong Y; Shi W; Zhao P; Ai FR; Wang RY
Zhongguo Yi Xue Ke Xue Yuan Xue Bao; 2007 Jun; 29(3):413-7. PubMed ID: 17633473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Matched comparison of Goldmann perimetry and automated two-zone suprathreshold Dicon perimetry in open-angle glaucoma.
Levy NS; Ellis E
Ann Ophthalmol; 1985 Apr; 17(4):245-9. PubMed ID: 4004003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Scanning laser polarimetry of the retinal nerve fiber layer in perimetrically unaffected eyes of glaucoma patients.
Reus NJ; Lemij HG
Ophthalmology; 2004 Dec; 111(12):2199-203. PubMed ID: 15582074
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Correlation between glaucomatous hemifield scotomas in white-on-white perimetry and blue-on-yellow perimetry using the oculus twinfield perimeter].
Denk PO; Markovic M; Knorr M
Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2004 Feb; 221(2):109-15. PubMed ID: 14986209
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of visual evoked potentials, automated perimetry and frequency-doubling perimetry in early detection of glaucomatous visual field loss.
Sarić D; Mandić Z; Iveković R; Geber MZ; Benić G; Tomić Z; Grgić D
Coll Antropol; 2005; 29 Suppl 1():111-3. PubMed ID: 16193690
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Clinical alternative for reducing the time needed to perform automated threshold perimetry.
Fingeret M
J Am Optom Assoc; 1995 Nov; 66(11):699-705. PubMed ID: 8576535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of conventional and pattern discrimination perimetry in a prospective study of glaucoma patients.
Ansari I; Chauhan BC; McCormick TA; LeBlanc RP
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2000 Dec; 41(13):4150-7. PubMed ID: 11095608
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Can frequency-doubling technology and short-wavelength automated perimetries detect visual field defects before standard automated perimetry in patients with preperimetric glaucoma?
Ferreras A; Polo V; Larrosa JM; Pablo LE; Pajarin AB; Pueyo V; Honrubia FM
J Glaucoma; 2007; 16(4):372-83. PubMed ID: 17571000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparing threshold visual fields between the Dicon TKS 4000 automated perimeter and the Humphrey Field Analyzer.
Wong AY; Dodge RM; Remington LA
J Am Optom Assoc; 1995 Nov; 66(11):706-11. PubMed ID: 8576536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Quantification of stato-kinetic dissociation by semi-automated perimetry.
Schiller J; Paetzold J; Vonthein R; Hart WM; Kurtenbach A; Schiefer U
Vision Res; 2006 Jan; 46(1-2):117-28. PubMed ID: 16260022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Static perimetry in glaucoma (a comparison with kinetic perimetry).
Khamar BM
Indian J Ophthalmol; 1982 Jul; 30(4):383-6. PubMed ID: 7166424
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Characteristics of frequency-of-seeing curves in normal subjects, patients with suspected glaucoma, and patients with glaucoma.
Chauhan BC; Tompkins JD; LeBlanc RP; McCormick TA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1993 Dec; 34(13):3534-40. PubMed ID: 8258511
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
