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 *

197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12637836)

  • 21. Clinical Evaluation Of a 0.05 D-step Binocular Wavefront Optometer in Young Adults in China.
    Cheng M; Chen X; Lei Y; Li B; Jiang Y; Xu Y; Zhou X; Wang X
    Clin Exp Optom; 2024 May; 107(4):395-401. PubMed ID: 36794379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Evaluation of a clinical aberrometer for lower-order accuracy and repeatability, higher-order repeatability, and instrument myopia.
    Salmon TO; van de Pol C
    Optometry; 2005 Aug; 76(8):461-72. PubMed ID: 16150413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Accuracy of autorefraction in an adult Indian population.
    Kumar RS; Moe CA; Kumar D; Rackenchath MV; A V SD; Nagaraj S; Wittberg DM; Stamper RL; Keenan JD
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(5):e0251583. PubMed ID: 34010350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Clinical evaluation of an eccentric infrared photorefractor: the PowerRefractor.
    Abrahamsson M; Ohlsson J; Björndahl M; Abrahamsson H
    Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 2003 Dec; 81(6):605-10. PubMed ID: 14641262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Accuracy and accommodation capability of a handheld autorefractor.
    Wesemann W; Dick B
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2000 Jan; 26(1):62-70. PubMed ID: 10646148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Population-based assessment of sensitivity and specificity of a pinhole for detection of significant refractive errors in the community.
    Marmamula S; Keeffe JE; Narsaiah S; Khanna RC; Rao GN
    Clin Exp Optom; 2014 Nov; 97(6):523-7. PubMed ID: 24909916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Evaluation of the SVOne Handheld Autorefractor in a Pediatric Population.
    Rosenfield M; Ciuffreda KJ
    Optom Vis Sci; 2017 Feb; 94(2):159-165. PubMed ID: 27668640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Assesment of the QuickSee wavefront autorefractor for characterizing refractive errors in school-age children.
    Gil A; Hernández CS; Pérez-Merino P; Rubio M; Velarde G; Abellanas-Lodares M; Román-Daza Á; Alejandre N; Jiménez-Alfaro I; Casares I; Dave SR; Lim D; Lage E
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(10):e0240933. PubMed ID: 33112912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Quantification of refractive error: comparison of autorefractor and focometer.
    du Toit R; Soong K; Brian G; Ramke J
    Optom Vis Sci; 2006 Aug; 83(8):582-8. PubMed ID: 16909083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Accuracy of a Smartphone-based Autorefractor Compared with Criterion-standard Refraction.
    Jeganathan VSE; Valikodath N; Niziol LM; Hansen S; Apostolou H; Woodward MA
    Optom Vis Sci; 2018 Dec; 95(12):1135-1141. PubMed ID: 30451804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Clinical evaluation of the Allergan Humphrey 500 autorefractor and the Nidek AR-1000 autorefractor.
    Kinge B; Midelfart A; Jacobsen G
    Br J Ophthalmol; 1996 Jan; 80(1):35-9. PubMed ID: 8664229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. [Accuracy of three common optometry methods in examination of refraction in juveniles].
    Su T; Min X; Liu S; Li F; Tan X; Zhong Y; Deng S
    Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban; 2016 Feb; 41(2):174-81. PubMed ID: 26932216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Evaluating refraction and visual acuity with the Nidek autorefractometer AR-360A in a randomized population-based screening study.
    Stoor K; Karvonen E; Liinamaa J; Saarela V
    Acta Ophthalmol; 2018 Jun; 96(4):384-389. PubMed ID: 29193822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Comparison of refractive error measures by the IRX3 aberrometer and autorefraction.
    McCullough SJ; Little JA; Breslin KM; Saunders KJ
    Optom Vis Sci; 2014 Oct; 91(10):1183-90. PubMed ID: 25192432
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Two-dimensional simulation of eccentric photorefraction images for ametropes: factors influencing the measurement.
    Wu Y; Thibos LN; Candy TR
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2018 Jul; 38(4):432-446. PubMed ID: 29736941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Does the Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Estimates Depend on the Measurement Principle of Autorefractors?
    Padhy D; Bharadwaj SR; Nayak S; Rath S; Das T
    Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2021 Jan; 10(1):2. PubMed ID: 33505769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The precision of wavefront refraction compared to subjective refraction and autorefraction.
    Pesudovs K; Parker KE; Cheng H; Applegate RA
    Optom Vis Sci; 2007 May; 84(5):387-92. PubMed ID: 17502821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Repeatability of the amplitude of accommodation measured by a new generation autorefractor.
    Weng CC; Hwang DK; Liu CJ
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(1):e0224733. PubMed ID: 31986151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Accommodation stimulus and response determinations with autorefractors.
    Atchison DA; Varnas SR
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2017 Jan; 37(1):96-104. PubMed ID: 28030883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Repeatability and Reproducibility of Virtual Subjective Refraction.
    Perches S; Collados MV; Ares J
    Optom Vis Sci; 2016 Oct; 93(10):1243-53. PubMed ID: 27391538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.