268 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17952009)
21. 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]
22. Comparison of matrix frequency-doubling technology perimetry and standard automated perimetry in monitoring the development of visual field defects for glaucoma suspect eyes.
Hu R; Wang C; Racette L
PLoS One; 2017; 12(5):e0178079. PubMed ID: 28542536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. Structure-function relationship between FDF, FDT, SAP, and scanning laser ophthalmoscopy in glaucoma patients.
Lamparter J; Russell RA; Schulze A; Schuff AC; Pfeiffer N; Hoffmann EM
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2012 Nov; 53(12):7553-9. PubMed ID: 23074201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Evaluation of the high specificity Screening Program (C-20-1) of the Frequency Doubling Technology (FDT) perimeter in clinical practice.
North RV; Jones AL; Hunter E; Morgan JE; Wild JM
Eye (Lond); 2006 Jun; 20(6):681-7. PubMed ID: 15999135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. [Comparison of frequency doubling technology perimetry and achromatic standard automated perimetry in patients with migraine without aura and controls].
Göbel K; Boyraz M; Schröder A; Erb C
Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2008 Aug; 225(8):718-22. PubMed ID: 18712657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Glaucoma progression detection with frequency doubling technology (FDT) compared to standard automated perimetry (SAP) in the Groningen Longitudinal Glaucoma Study.
Wesselink C; Jansonius NM
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2017 Sep; 37(5):594-601. PubMed ID: 28836391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. [Initial findings with pulsar perimetry in patients with ocular hypertension].
Vidal-Fernández A; García Feijoó J; González-Hernández M; González De La Rosa M; García Sánchez J
Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol; 2002 Jun; 77(6):321-6. PubMed ID: 12058290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Short-wavelength automated perimetry and frequency-doubling technology perimetry in glaucoma.
Fogagnolo P; Rossetti L; Ranno S; Ferreras A; Orzalesi N
Prog Brain Res; 2008; 173():101-24. PubMed ID: 18929104
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. 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]
31. Learning effect of short-wavelength automated perimetry in patients with ocular hypertension.
Rossetti L; Fogagnolo P; Miglior S; Centofanti M; Vetrugno M; Orzalesi N
J Glaucoma; 2006 Oct; 15(5):399-404. PubMed ID: 16988602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Strategies for improving the diagnostic specificity of the frequency doubling perimeter.
Heeg GP; Stoutenbeek R; Jansonius NM
Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 2005 Feb; 83(1):53-6. PubMed ID: 15715557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The influence of learning effect on frequency doubling technology perimetry (Matrix).
Contestabile MT; Perdicchi A; Amodeo S; Recupero V; Recupero SM
J Glaucoma; 2007 May; 16(3):297-301. PubMed ID: 17438423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. 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]
35. Influence of test reliability on the screening performance of frequency-doubling perimetry.
Heeg GP; Jansonius NM
Am J Ophthalmol; 2006 Mar; 141(3):585-7. PubMed ID: 16490521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. [Update on glaucoma diagnosis and follow-up].
González de la Rosa MA
Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol; 2003 Jun; 78(6):299-314. PubMed ID: 12838462
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Frequency doubling technology staging system 2.
Brusini P
J Glaucoma; 2006 Aug; 15(4):315-20. PubMed ID: 16865009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. [Comparing the ranges of defect measured with standard white on white and Pulsar perimetries].
González de la Rosa M; González-Hernández M; García-Feijoo J; Sánchez Méndez M; García-Sánchez J
Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol; 2011 Apr; 86(4):113-7. PubMed ID: 21569920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Comparison of Standard Automated Perimetry, Short-Wavelength Automated Perimetry, and Frequency-Doubling Technology Perimetry to Monitor Glaucoma Progression.
Hu R; Wang C; Gu Y; Racette L
Medicine (Baltimore); 2016 Feb; 95(7):e2618. PubMed ID: 26886602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. [Diagnostic capability of PULSAR, FDT y HRT-II in glaucoma suspects].
González-de-la-Rosa M; González-Hernández M; Aguilar-Estévez J; Díaz-Alemán T; Armas-Plasencia R
Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol; 2007 Jul; 82(7):413-22. PubMed ID: 17647116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
