305 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11190023)
21. Frequency doubling technology for earlier detection of functional damage in standard automated perimetry-normal hemifield in glaucoma with low-to-normal pressure.
Nakagawa S; Murata H; Saito H; Nakahara H; Mataki N; Tomidokoro A; Iwase A; Araie M
J Glaucoma; 2012 Jan; 21(1):22-6. PubMed ID: 21543995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Comparison of standard automated perimetry with matrix frequency-doubling technology in patients with resolved optic neuritis.
Sakai T; Matsushima M; Shikishima K; Kitahara K
Ophthalmology; 2007 May; 114(5):949-56. PubMed ID: 17382395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Visual field testing with the new Humphrey Matrix: a comparison between the FDT N-30 and Matrix N-30-F tests.
Brusini P; Salvetat ML; Zeppieri M; Tosoni C; Parisi L; Felletti M
Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 2006 Jun; 84(3):351-6. PubMed ID: 16704697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Long-term reproducibility of screening for glaucoma with FDT-perimetry.
Horn FK; Link B; Mardin CY; Jünemann AG; Martus P
J Glaucoma; 2007 Aug; 16(5):448-55. PubMed ID: 17700287
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Frequency doubling perimetry and short-wavelength automated perimetry to detect early glaucoma.
Leeprechanon N; Giaconi JA; Manassakorn A; Hoffman D; Caprioli J
Ophthalmology; 2007 May; 114(5):931-7. PubMed ID: 17397926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Diagnostic sensitivity of fast blue-yellow and standard automated perimetry in early glaucoma: a comparison between different test programs.
Bengtsson B; Heijl A
Ophthalmology; 2006 Jul; 113(7):1092-7. PubMed ID: 16815399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Variability components of standard automated perimetry and frequency-doubling technology perimetry.
Spry PG; Johnson CA; McKendrick AM; Turpin A
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2001 May; 42(6):1404-10. PubMed ID: 11328758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Impact of cataract on the results of frequency-doubling technology perimetry.
Tanna AP; Abraham C; Lai J; Shen J
Ophthalmology; 2004 Aug; 111(8):1504-7. PubMed ID: 15288979
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. [Frequency doubling perimetry in terminal visual field defects].
Muñoz-Negrete FJ; Rebolleda G; González Martín-Moro J; Cerio-Ramsden CD
Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol; 2003 Apr; 78(4):203-9. PubMed ID: 12743844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Automated flicker perimetry in glaucoma using Octopus 311: a comparative study with the Humphrey Matrix.
Matsumoto C; Takada S; Okuyama S; Arimura E; Hashimoto S; Shimomura Y
Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 2006 Apr; 84(2):210-5. PubMed ID: 16637839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Sensitivity and specificity of frequency-doubling technology, tendency-oriented perimetry, SITA Standard and SITA Fast perimetry in perimetrically inexperienced individuals.
Pierre-Filho Pde T; Schimiti RB; de Vasconcellos JP; Costa VP
Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 2006 Jun; 84(3):345-50. PubMed ID: 16704696
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. The results of screening frequency doubling technology perimetry in different locations of the community.
Mansberger SL; Johnson CA; Cioffi GA
J Glaucoma; 2007 Jan; 16(1):73-80. PubMed ID: 17224754
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Optimizing the use of frequency doubling technology perimetry in community vision screenings.
Nehmad L; Madonna RJ
Optom Vis Sci; 2008 Jul; 85(7):559-65. PubMed ID: 18594349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. [Correlation between confocal tomography of the optic nerve (HRT) and the perimetric frequency doubling technology].
Sampaolesi R; Brusini P; Sampaolesi JR
Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2003 Nov; 220(11):754-66. PubMed ID: 14634902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Evaluation of the high specificity Screening Program (C-20-1) of the Frequency Doubling Technology (FDT) perimeter in clinical practice.
North RV; Jones AL; Hunter E; Morgan JE; Wild JM
Eye (Lond); 2006 Jun; 20(6):681-7. PubMed ID: 15999135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. [The value of frequency doubling perimetry in glaucoma screening of aged 40 or more population].
Li JJ; Xu L; Zhang RX; Sun XY; Yang H; Zou Y; Zhao JL
Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2005 Mar; 41(3):221-5. PubMed ID: 15840362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma.
Artes PH; Hutchison DM; Nicolela MT; LeBlanc RP; Chauhan BC
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Jul; 46(7):2451-7. PubMed ID: 15980235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. A comparison between microperimetry and standard achromatic perimetry of the central visual field in eyes with glaucomatous paracentral visual-field defects.
Lima VC; Prata TS; De Moraes CG; Kim J; Seiple W; Rosen RB; Liebmann JM; Ritch R
Br J Ophthalmol; 2010 Jan; 94(1):64-7. PubMed ID: 19692366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Repeatability of automated perimetry: a comparison between standard automated perimetry with stimulus size III and V, matrix, and motion perimetry.
Wall M; Woodward KR; Doyle CK; Artes PH
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2009 Feb; 50(2):974-9. PubMed ID: 18952921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Detecting early functional damage in glaucoma suspect and ocular hypertensive patients with the multifocal VEP technique.
Thienprasiddhi P; Greenstein VC; Chu DH; Xu L; Liebmann JM; Ritch R; Hood DC
J Glaucoma; 2006 Aug; 15(4):321-7. PubMed ID: 16865010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
