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 *

109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1852395)

  • 21. Comparison of visual field sensitivities between the Medmont automated perimeter and the Humphrey field analyser.
    Landers J; Sharma A; Goldberg I; Graham SL
    Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2010 Apr; 38(3):273-6. PubMed ID: 20447123
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Eye Movement Perimetry and Frequency Doubling Perimetry: clinical performance and patient preference during glaucoma screening.
    Meethal NSK; Pel JJM; Mazumdar D; Asokan R; Panday M; van der Steen J; George R
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2019 Jun; 257(6):1277-1287. PubMed ID: 30944987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Central 10-degree visual field change following non-penetrating deep sclerectomy in severe and end-stage glaucoma: preliminary results.
    Leleu I; Penaud B; Blumen-Ohana E; Rodallec T; Adam R; Laplace O; Akesbi J; Nordmann JP
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2018 Aug; 256(8):1489-1498. PubMed ID: 29862428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Simulating binocular visual field status in glaucoma.
    Crabb DP; Viswanathan AC; McNaught AI; Poinoosawmy D; Fitzke FW; Hitchings RA
    Br J Ophthalmol; 1998 Nov; 82(11):1236-41. PubMed ID: 9924324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Vision restoration training for glaucoma: a randomized clinical trial.
    Sabel BA; Gudlin J
    JAMA Ophthalmol; 2014 Apr; 132(4):381-9. PubMed ID: 24504128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Sensitivity and specificity of the Swedish interactive threshold algorithm for glaucomatous visual field defects.
    Budenz DL; Rhee P; Feuer WJ; McSoley J; Johnson CA; Anderson DR
    Ophthalmology; 2002 Jun; 109(6):1052-8. PubMed ID: 12045043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Analysis of reliability indices from Humphrey visual field tests in an urban glaucoma population.
    Birt CM; Shin DH; Samudrala V; Hughes BA; Kim C; Lee D
    Ophthalmology; 1997 Jul; 104(7):1126-30. PubMed ID: 9224465
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Central Field Index Versus Visual Field Index for Central Visual Function in Stable Glaucoma.
    Rao A; Padhy D; Mudunuri H; Roy AK; Sarangi SP; Das G
    J Glaucoma; 2017 Jan; 26(1):1-7. PubMed ID: 27636596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Interobserver agreement on visual field progression in glaucoma: a comparison of methods.
    Viswanathan AC; Crabb DP; McNaught AI; Westcott MC; Kamal D; Garway-Heath DF; Fitzke FW; Hitchings RA
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2003 Jun; 87(6):726-30. PubMed ID: 12770970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A comparison of Goldmann and Humphrey automated perimetry in patients with glaucoma.
    Trope GE; Britton R
    Br J Ophthalmol; 1987 Jul; 71(7):489-93. PubMed ID: 3307897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Influence of posture on the visual field in glaucoma patients and controls.
    Lietz A; Kaiser HJ; Stümpfig D; Flammer J
    Ophthalmologica; 1995; 209(3):129-31. PubMed ID: 7630618
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Short-wavelength automated perimetry in low-, medium-, and high-risk ocular hypertensive eyes. Initial baseline results.
    Johnson CA; Brandt JD; Khong AM; Adams AJ
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1995 Jan; 113(1):70-6. PubMed ID: 7826296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. [Relationship between visual field index and visual field morphological stages of glaucoma and their diagnostic value].
    Hou XR; Qin JY; Ren ZQ
    Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2017 Feb; 53(2):92-97. PubMed ID: 28260358
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Development of a test grid using Eye Movement Perimetry for screening glaucomatous visual field defects.
    Kadavath Meethal NS; Mazumdar D; Asokan R; Panday M; van der Steen J; Vermeer KA; Lemij HG; George RJ; Pel JJM
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2018 Feb; 256(2):371-379. PubMed ID: 29282563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Oculokinetic perimetry compared with Humphrey visual field analysis in the detection of glaucomatous visual field loss.
    Wishart PK
    Eye (Lond); 1993; 7 ( Pt 1)():113-21. PubMed ID: 8325400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparison of Size Modulation Standard Automated Perimetry and Conventional Standard Automated Perimetry with a 10-2 Test Program in Glaucoma Patients.
    Hirasawa K; Takahashi N; Satou T; Kasahara M; Matsumura K; Shoji N
    Curr Eye Res; 2017 Aug; 42(8):1160-1168. PubMed ID: 28441081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study. 2. Visual field test scoring and reliability.
    Ophthalmology; 1994 Aug; 101(8):1445-55. PubMed ID: 7741836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Aviation medicine. Problems of altitude I: hypoxia and hyperventilation.
    Harding RM; Mills FJ
    Br Med J (Clin Res Ed); 1983 Apr; 286(6375):1408-10. PubMed ID: 6404482
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. High- versus low-density multifocal pupillographic objective perimetry in glaucoma.
    Maddess T; Essex RW; Kolic M; Carle CF; James AC
    Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2013 Mar; 41(2):140-7. PubMed ID: 23078067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Assessment of novel binocular colour, motion and contrast tests in glaucoma.
    Rauscher FG; Chisholm CM; Edgar DF; Barbur JL
    Cell Tissue Res; 2013 Aug; 353(2):297-310. PubMed ID: 23812834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.