403 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18766368)
1. Resolving the clinical acuity categories "hand motion" and "counting fingers" using the Freiburg Visual Acuity Test (FrACT).
Lange C; Feltgen N; Junker B; Schulze-Bonsel K; Bach M
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2009 Jan; 247(1):137-42. PubMed ID: 18766368
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Visual acuities "hand motion" and "counting fingers" can be quantified with the freiburg visual acuity test.
Schulze-Bonsel K; Feltgen N; Burau H; Hansen L; Bach M
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Mar; 47(3):1236-40. PubMed ID: 16505064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A Randomized Crossover Study to Assess the Usability of Two New Vision Tests in Patients with Low Vision.
Jolly JK; Gray JM; Salvetti AP; Han RC; MacLaren RE
Optom Vis Sci; 2019 Jun; 96(6):443-452. PubMed ID: 31058709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The Freiburg Acuity Test in Preschool Children: Testability, Test-Retest Variability, and Comparison With LEA Symbols.
Farassat N; Jehle V; Heinrich SP; Lagrèze WA; Bach M
Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2024 Mar; 13(3):14. PubMed ID: 38502142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Visual evoked potential-based acuity assessment: overestimation in amblyopia.
Wenner Y; Heinrich SP; Beisse C; Fuchs A; Bach M
Doc Ophthalmol; 2014 Jun; 128(3):191-200. PubMed ID: 24623357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A comparison of the performance of three visual evoked potential-based methods to estimate visual acuity.
Kurtenbach A; Langrová H; Messias A; Zrenner E; Jägle H
Doc Ophthalmol; 2013 Feb; 126(1):45-56. PubMed ID: 23143759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Establishing Prediction Intervals for the SpeedWheel Acuity Test in Adults and Children.
Luethy ML; Schötzau A; Palmowski-Wolfe A
Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2021 Apr; 238(4):488-492. PubMed ID: 33853189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Comparison of two visual acuity tests in school enrolment examinations : Tumbling E test versus Freiburg visual acuity test].
Bach M; Reuter M; Lagrèze WA
Ophthalmologe; 2016 Aug; 113(8):684-9. PubMed ID: 27048550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Scotopic and Photopic Conventional Visual Acuity and Hyperacuity - Binocular Summation.
Korn S; Al-Nosairy KO; Gopiswaminathan AV; João C; Scanferla L; Bach M; Hoffmann MB
Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2024 Apr; 13(4):25. PubMed ID: 38639931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Is conversion of decimal visual acuity measurements to logMAR values reliable?
Mataftsi A; Koutsimpogeorgos D; Brazitikos P; Ziakas N; Haidich AB
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2019 Jul; 257(7):1513-1517. PubMed ID: 31069515
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of LogMAR Eye charts with angular vision for visually impaired: the Berkeley rudimentary vision test vs LogMAR One target Landolt ring Eye chart.
Miwa M; Iwanami M; Oba MS; Mizuki N; Nishida T
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2013 Dec; 251(12):2761-7. PubMed ID: 24057176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. The Freiburg Visual Acuity Test-variability unchanged by post-hoc re-analysis.
Bach M
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2007 Jul; 245(7):965-71. PubMed ID: 17219125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. VEP-based acuity assessment in low vision.
Hoffmann MB; Brands J; Behrens-Baumann W; Bach M
Doc Ophthalmol; 2017 Dec; 135(3):209-218. PubMed ID: 28980154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Determination of scotopic and photopic conventional visual acuity and hyperacuity.
Freundlieb PH; Herbik A; Kramer FH; Bach M; Hoffmann MB
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2020 Jan; 258(1):129-135. PubMed ID: 31754827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Basic quantitative assessment of visual performance in patients with very low vision.
Bach M; Wilke M; Wilhelm B; Zrenner E; Wilke R
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2010 Feb; 51(2):1255-60. PubMed ID: 19850846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of the "Freiburg Acuity VEP" on Commercial Equipment.
Bach M; Farmer JD
Doc Ophthalmol; 2020 Apr; 140(2):139-145. PubMed ID: 31584130
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Visual Acuity Testing: Feedback Affects Neither Outcome nor Reproducibility, but Leaves Participants Happier.
Bach M; Schäfer K
PLoS One; 2016; 11(1):e0147803. PubMed ID: 26824693
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Visual outcome and risk factors for light perception and no light perception vision after vitrectomy for diabetic retinopathy.
Mason JO; Colagross CT; Haleman T; Fuller JJ; White MF; Feist RM; Emond TL; McGwin G
Am J Ophthalmol; 2005 Aug; 140(2):231-5. PubMed ID: 15992755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effect of simulated refractive error on adult visual acuity for paediatric tests.
Paudel N; Jacobs RJ; Sloan R; Denny S; Shea K; Thompson B; Anstice N
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2017 Jul; 37(4):521-530. PubMed ID: 28656671
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A computerized method of visual acuity testing: adaptation of the early treatment of diabetic retinopathy study testing protocol.
Beck RW; Moke PS; Turpin AH; Ferris FL; SanGiovanni JP; Johnson CA; Birch EE; Chandler DL; Cox TA; Blair RC; Kraker RT
Am J Ophthalmol; 2003 Feb; 135(2):194-205. PubMed ID: 12566024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
