These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12128022)

  • 1. New, sensitive window on abnormal spatial vision: rarebit probing.
    Frisén L
    Vision Res; 2002 Jul; 42(15):1931-9. PubMed ID: 12128022
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. High-pass resolution perimetry in neuro-ophthalmology. Clinical impressions.
    Lindblom B; Hoyt WF
    Ophthalmology; 1992 May; 99(5):700-5. PubMed ID: 1594214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Sensitivity and specificity of frequency doubling perimetry in neuro-ophthalmic disorders: a comparison with conventional automated perimetry.
    Wall M; Neahring RK; Woodward KR
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2002 Apr; 43(4):1277-83. PubMed ID: 11923276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Blue-on-yellow perimetry can predict the development of glaucomatous visual field loss.
    Johnson CA; Adams AJ; Casson EJ; Brandt JD
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1993 May; 111(5):645-50. PubMed ID: 8489447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Probing glaucoma visual damage by rarebit perimetry.
    Brusini P; Salvetat ML; Parisi L; Zeppieri M
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2005 Feb; 89(2):180-4. PubMed ID: 15665349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Relative dispersion analysis enhances perimetric sensitivity.
    Frisén L; Rossitti S
    Vision Res; 1996 Feb; 36(3):491-7. PubMed ID: 8746237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Component perimetry: a fast method to detect visual field defects caused by brain lesions.
    Bachmann G; Fahle M
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2000 Sep; 41(10):2870-86. PubMed ID: 10967040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Confrontation visual field loss as a function of decibel sensitivity loss on automated static perimetry. Implications on the accuracy of confrontation visual field testing.
    Shahinfar S; Johnson LN; Madsen RW
    Ophthalmology; 1995 Jun; 102(6):872-7. PubMed ID: 7777293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Can Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm fast perimetry be used as an alternative to goldmann perimetry in neuro-ophthalmic practice?
    Szatmáry G; Biousse V; Newman NJ
    Arch Ophthalmol; 2002 Sep; 120(9):1162-73. PubMed ID: 12215089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Rarebit perimetry for bedside testing: comparison with standard automated perimetry.
    Steven Houston SK; Weber ED; Koga SF; Newman SA
    J Neuroophthalmol; 2010 Sep; 30(3):243-7. PubMed ID: 20548245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Identifying glaucomatous vision loss with visual-function-specific perimetry in the diagnostic innovations in glaucoma study.
    Sample PA; Medeiros FA; Racette L; Pascual JP; Boden C; Zangwill LM; Bowd C; Weinreb RN
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Aug; 47(8):3381-9. PubMed ID: 16877406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of conventional and high-pass resolution perimetry in a prospective study of patients with glaucoma and healthy controls.
    Chauhan BC; House PH; McCormick TA; LeBlanc RP
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1999 Jan; 117(1):24-33. PubMed ID: 9930157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Performance of a rapid rarebit central-vision test with optic neuropathies.
    Frisén L
    Optom Vis Sci; 2012 Aug; 89(8):1192-5. PubMed ID: 22797513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Short-wavelength automated perimetry in neuro-ophthalmologic disorders.
    Keltner JL; Johnson CA
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1995 Apr; 113(4):475-81. PubMed ID: 7710398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of visual field defects using matrix perimetry and standard achromatic perimetry.
    Patel A; Wollstein G; Ishikawa H; Schuman JS
    Ophthalmology; 2007 Mar; 114(3):480-7. PubMed ID: 17123623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Multifocal objective perimetry in the detection of glaucomatous field loss.
    Goldberg I; Graham SL; Klistorner AI
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2002 Jan; 133(1):29-39. PubMed ID: 11755837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of high-pass resolution perimetry and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma.
    Martinez GA; Sample PA; Weinreb RN
    Am J Ophthalmol; 1995 Feb; 119(2):195-201. PubMed ID: 7832226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Neural losses correlated with visual losses in clinical perimetry.
    Harwerth RS; Carter-Dawson L; Smith EL; Barnes G; Holt WF; Crawford ML
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2004 Sep; 45(9):3152-60. PubMed ID: 15326134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling perimetry.
    Johnson CA; Samuels SJ
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1997 Feb; 38(2):413-25. PubMed ID: 9040475
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Parallel rarebits: a novel, large-scale visual field screening method.
    Lin SR; Fijalkowski N; Lin BR; Li F; Singh K; Chang RT
    Clin Exp Optom; 2014 Nov; 97(6):528-33. PubMed ID: 25331077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.