513 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15671281)
1. Glaucomatous visual field progression with frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in a longitudinal prospective study.
Haymes SA; Hutchison DM; McCormick TA; Varma DK; Nicolela MT; LeBlanc RP; Chauhan BC
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Feb; 46(2):547-54. PubMed ID: 15671281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Usefulness of frequency-doubling technology for perimetrically normal eyes of open-angle glaucoma patients with unilateral field loss.
Fan X; Wu LL; Ma ZZ; Xiao GG; Liu F
Ophthalmology; 2010 Aug; 117(8):1530-7, 1537.e1-2. PubMed ID: 20466428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Relationship of SITA and full-threshold standard perimetry to frequency-doubling technology perimetry in glaucoma.
Boden C; Pascual J; Medeiros FA; Aihara M; Weinreb RN; Sample PA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Jul; 46(7):2433-9. PubMed ID: 15980232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Frequency doubling technology perimetry abnormalities as predictors of glaucomatous visual field loss.
Medeiros FA; Sample PA; Weinreb RN
Am J Ophthalmol; 2004 May; 137(5):863-71. PubMed ID: 15126151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Frequency doubling technology perimetry in open-angle glaucoma eyes with hemifield visual field damage: comparison of high-tension and normal-tension groups.
Murata H; Tomidokoro A; Matsuo H; Tomita G; Araie M
J Glaucoma; 2007 Jan; 16(1):9-13. PubMed ID: 17224743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Relationship between Humphrey 30-2 SITA Standard Test, Matrix 30-2 threshold test, and Heidelberg retina tomograph in ocular hypertensive and glaucoma patients.
Bozkurt B; Yilmaz PT; Irkec M
J Glaucoma; 2008; 17(3):203-10. PubMed ID: 18414106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Frequency-doubling technology perimetry for detection of the development of visual field defects in glaucoma suspect eyes: a prospective study.
Liu S; Yu M; Weinreb RN; Lai G; Lam DS; Leung CK
JAMA Ophthalmol; 2014 Jan; 132(1):77-83. PubMed ID: 24177945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Glaucoma detection with frequency doubling perimetry and short-wavelength perimetry.
Horn FK; Brenning A; Jünemann AG; Lausen B
J Glaucoma; 2007; 16(4):363-71. PubMed ID: 17570999
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Corneal thickness measurements and frequency doubling technology perimetry abnormalities in ocular hypertensive eyes.
Medeiros FA; Sample PA; Weinreb RN
Ophthalmology; 2003 Oct; 110(10):1903-8. PubMed ID: 14522761
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Visual function-specific perimetry for indirect comparison of different ganglion cell populations in glaucoma.
Sample PA; Bosworth CF; Blumenthal EZ; Girkin C; Weinreb RN
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2000 Jun; 41(7):1783-90. PubMed ID: 10845599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Detectability of glaucomatous changes using SAP, FDT, flicker perimetry, and OCT.
Nomoto H; Matsumoto C; Takada S; Hashimoto S; Arimura E; Okuyama S; Shimomura Y
J Glaucoma; 2009 Feb; 18(2):165-71. PubMed ID: 19225357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Frequency-doubling perimetry: comparison with standard automated perimetry to detect glaucoma.
Leeprechanon N; Giangiacomo A; Fontana H; Hoffman D; Caprioli J
Am J Ophthalmol; 2007 Feb; 143(2):263-271. PubMed ID: 17178091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
