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 *

75 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18637108)

  • 1. Fixation stability during Rarebit Fovea Test.
    Nilsson MM; Stevenson SB; Kumar G; Martin L; Brautaset RL
    Clin Exp Optom; 2009 Jan; 92(1):9-13. PubMed ID: 18637108
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Rarebit perimetry and fovea test before and after cataract surgery.
    Nilsson M; Abdiu O; Laurell CG; Martin L
    Acta Ophthalmol; 2010 Jun; 88(4):479-82. PubMed ID: 19432846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Rarebit fovea test in children: reference data for children aged six to 10 years.
    Nilsson M; Svanberg M; Schalin S; Brautaset RL
    Clin Exp Optom; 2012 Jan; 95(1):48-53. PubMed ID: 22023152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Perception of very small visual stimuli in the fovea: normative data for the Rarebit Foveal Test.
    Nilsson M; Wanger P; Martin L
    Clin Exp Optom; 2006 Mar; 89(2):81-5. PubMed ID: 16494610
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Foveal function in children treated for amblyopia.
    Agervi P; Nilsson M; Martin L
    Acta Ophthalmol; 2010 Mar; 88(2):222-6. PubMed ID: 19183413
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Rarebit perimetry: normative values and test-retest variability.
    Chin CF; Yip LW; Sim DC; Yeo AC
    Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2011 Nov; 39(8):752-9. PubMed ID: 22050562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Re-evaluating split-fovea processing in word recognition: effects of retinal eccentricity on hemispheric dominance.
    Jordan TR; Paterson KB; Stachurski M
    Neuropsychology; 2008 Nov; 22(6):738-45. PubMed ID: 18999347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Perimetry while moving the eyes: implications for the variability of visual field defects.
    Toepfer A; Kasten E; Guenther T; Sabel BA
    J Neuroophthalmol; 2008 Dec; 28(4):308-19. PubMed ID: 19145132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Quantitative measurement of fixation stability during RareBit perimetry and Humphrey visual field testing.
    Lin SR; Lai IN; Dutta S; Singh K; Chang RT
    J Glaucoma; 2015 Feb; 24(2):100-4. PubMed ID: 25642647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Right visual field advantage in parafoveal processing: evidence from eye-fixation-related potentials.
    Simola J; Holmqvist K; Lindgren M
    Brain Lang; 2009 Nov; 111(2):101-13. PubMed ID: 19782390
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Transient improvements in fixational stability in strabismic amblyopes following bifoveal fixation and reduced interocular suppression.
    Raveendran RN; Babu RJ; Hess RF; Bobier WR
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2014 Mar; 34(2):214-25. PubMed ID: 24495165
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The Fixation Distance to the Stimulus Influences ERP Quality: An EEG and Eye Tracking N400 Study.
    Domínguez-Martínez E; Parise E; Strandvall T; Reid VM
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(7):e0134339. PubMed ID: 26222059
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Re-evaluating split-fovea processing in word recognition: effects of word length.
    Jordan TR; Paterson KB; Stachurski M
    Cortex; 2009 Apr; 45(4):495-505. PubMed ID: 19231478
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Retinal sensitivity and spatial summation in amblyopia.
    Mimura O; Inui T; Kani K; Ohmi E
    Jpn J Ophthalmol; 1984; 28(4):389-400. PubMed ID: 6530839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Amblyopic reading is crowded.
    Levi DM; Song S; Pelli DG
    J Vis; 2007 Oct; 7(2):21.1-17. PubMed ID: 18217836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Fixation stability using central and pericentral fixation targets in patients with age-related macular degeneration.
    Bellmann C; Feely M; Crossland MD; Kabanarou SA; Rubin GS
    Ophthalmology; 2004 Dec; 111(12):2265-70. PubMed ID: 15582084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Variability in monocular and binocular fixation during standard automated perimetry.
    Hirasawa K; Kobayashi K; Shibamoto A; Tobari H; Fukuda Y; Shoji N
    PLoS One; 2018; 13(11):e0207517. PubMed ID: 30462706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Hemispheric representation of the central retina of commissurotomized subjects.
    Sugishita M; Hamilton CR; Sakuma I; Hemmi I
    Neuropsychologia; 1994 Apr; 32(4):399-415. PubMed ID: 8047248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Rarebit perimetry in normal subjects: test-retest variability, learning effect, normative range, influence of optical defocus, and cataract extraction.
    Salvetat ML; Zeppieri M; Parisi L; Brusini P
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2007 Nov; 48(11):5320-31. PubMed ID: 17962489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Visual field recovery after vision restoration therapy (VRT) is independent of eye movements: an eye tracker study.
    Kasten E; Bunzenthal U; Sabel BA
    Behav Brain Res; 2006 Nov; 175(1):18-26. PubMed ID: 16970999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.