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 *

170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17224754)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Impact of diabetes on glaucoma screening using frequency-doubling perimetry.
    Realini T; Lai MQ; Barber L
    Ophthalmology; 2004 Nov; 111(11):2133-6. PubMed ID: 15522382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Performance of frequency-doubling technology perimetry in a population-based prevalence survey of glaucoma: the Tajimi study.
    Iwase A; Tomidokoro A; Araie M; Shirato S; Shimizu H; Kitazawa Y;
    Ophthalmology; 2007 Jan; 114(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 17070580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Community visual field screening: prevalence of follow-up and factors associated with follow-up of participants with abnormal frequency doubling perimetry technology results.
    Mansberger SL; Edmunds B; Johnson CA; Kent KJ; Cioffi GA
    Ophthalmic Epidemiol; 2007; 14(3):134-40. PubMed ID: 17613848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Frequency doubling perimetry and the detection of eye disease in the community.
    Cioffi GA; Mansberger S; Spry P; Johnson C; Van Buskirk EM
    Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc; 2000; 98():195-9; discussion 199-202. PubMed ID: 11190023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Does frequency doubling technology perimetry reliably detect neurological visual field defects?
    Fong KC; Byles DB; Constable PH
    Eye (Lond); 2003 Apr; 17(3):330-3. PubMed ID: 12724694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Evaluation of decision rules for frequency-doubling technology screening tests.
    Gardiner SK; Anderson DR; Fingeret M; McSoley JJ; Johnson CA
    Optom Vis Sci; 2006 Jul; 83(7):432-7. PubMed ID: 16840859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. [FDT versus automated standard perimetry in healthy subjects].
    Chiseliţa D; Ioana MC; Danielescu C; Mihaela NM
    Oftalmologia; 2006; 50(3):99-104. PubMed ID: 17144515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Performance of efficient test procedures for frequency-doubling technology perimetry in normal and glaucomatous eyes.
    Turpin A; McKendrick AM; Johnson CA; Vingrys AJ
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2002 Mar; 43(3):709-15. PubMed ID: 11867588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Repeatability of frequency doubling technology perimetry (20-1 screening program) and the effect of pupillary dilatation on interpretation.
    Parikh R; Muliyil J; George R; Bhat S; Thomas R
    Ophthalmic Epidemiol; 2008; 15(1):42-6. PubMed ID: 18300088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Learning effect among perimetric novices with screening C-20-1 frequency doubling technology perimetry.
    Brush MB; Chen PP
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2004 Mar; 137(3):551-2. PubMed ID: 15013879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Localized retinal nerve fiber layer defects and visual field abnormalities by humphrey matrix frequency doubling technology perimetry.
    Lee MJ; Kim DM; Jeoung JW; Hwang SS; Kim TW; Park KH
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2007 Jun; 143(6):1056-8. PubMed ID: 17524781
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.