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.
135 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17006754)
1. Evaluation of Goldmann applanation tonometry using a nonlinear finite element ocular model. Elsheikh A; Wang D; Kotecha A; Brown M; Garway-Heath D Ann Biomed Eng; 2006 Oct; 34(10):1628-40. PubMed ID: 17006754 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Finite element simulation of Goldmann tonometry after refractive surgery. Asejczyk-Widlicka M; Srodka W Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2020 Jan; 71():24-28. PubMed ID: 31677547 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of the influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure measurements using the ocular response analyzer. Medeiros FA; Weinreb RN J Glaucoma; 2006 Oct; 15(5):364-70. PubMed ID: 16988597 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Effects of central corneal thickness and corneal curvature on measurement of intraocular pressure with Goldmann applanation tonometer and non-contact tonometer]. Zhang Y; Zhao JL; Bian AL; Liu XL; Jin YM Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2009 Aug; 45(8):713-8. PubMed ID: 20021884 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Relationship between corneal biomechanical properties, central corneal thickness, and intraocular pressure across the spectrum of glaucoma. Kaushik S; Pandav SS; Banger A; Aggarwal K; Gupta A Am J Ophthalmol; 2012 May; 153(5):840-849.e2. PubMed ID: 22310080 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparisons between Pascal dynamic contour tonometry, the TonoPen, and Goldmann applanation tonometry in patients with glaucoma. Salvetat ML; Zeppieri M; Tosoni C; Brusini P Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 2007 May; 85(3):272-9. PubMed ID: 17488456 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Numerical study on human cornea and modified multiparametric correction equation for Goldmann applanation tonometer. Khan MA J Mech Behav Biomed Mater; 2014 Feb; 30():91-102. PubMed ID: 24269944 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of Intraocular Pressure Measurements Obtained by Rebound, Noncontact, and Goldmann Applanation Tonometry in Children. Feng CS; Jin KW; Yi K; Choi DG Am J Ophthalmol; 2015 Nov; 160(5):937-943.e1. PubMed ID: 26210864 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of dynamic contour tonometry and goldmann applanation tonometry in glaucoma patients and healthy subjects. Barleon L; Hoffmann EM; Berres M; Pfeiffer N; Grus FH Am J Ophthalmol; 2006 Oct; 142(4):583-90. PubMed ID: 17011849 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An ultra-high-speed Scheimpflug camera for evaluation of corneal deformation response and its impact on IOP measurement. Leung CK; Ye C; Weinreb RN Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2013 Apr; 54(4):2885-92. PubMed ID: 23482466 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [What to do if the intraocular pressure measurement does not appear reliable]. Hamard P J Fr Ophtalmol; 2010 Apr; 33(4):279-84. PubMed ID: 20347507 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [The influence of corneal thickness and curvature on the difference between intraocular pressure measurements obtained with a non-contact tonometer and those with a Goldmann applanation tonometer]. Matsumoto T; Makino H; Uozato H; Saishin M; Miyamoto S Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi; 2000 May; 104(5):317-23. PubMed ID: 10835885 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Corneal parameters and difference between goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry in normal eyes. Lanza M; Borrelli M; De Bernardo M; Filosa ML; Rosa N J Glaucoma; 2008 Sep; 17(6):460-4. PubMed ID: 18794680 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]