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 *

144 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18791730)

  • 1. Repeatability intraexaminer and agreement in amplitude of accommodation measurements.
    Antona B; Barra F; Barrio A; Gonzalez E; Sanchez I
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2009 Jan; 247(1):121-7. PubMed ID: 18791730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Repeatability of two subjective accommodative amplitude measurements and agreement with an objective method.
    Chen Y; Zhang C; Ding C; Tao C; Bao J; Zheng J; Chen H
    Clin Exp Optom; 2019 Jul; 102(4):412-417. PubMed ID: 30866109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Repeatability of clinical measurements of the amplitude of accommodation.
    Rosenfield M; Cohen AS
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 1996 May; 16(3):247-9. PubMed ID: 8977892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A comparison of the reliability of dynamic retinoscopy and subjective measurements of amplitude of accommodation.
    León AÁ; Medrano SM; Rosenfield M
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2012 Mar; 32(2):133-41. PubMed ID: 22268597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparing measurement techniques of accommodative amplitudes.
    Momeni-Moghaddam H; Kundart J; Askarizadeh F
    Indian J Ophthalmol; 2014 Jun; 62(6):683-7. PubMed ID: 25005195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Intra-examiner repeatability and agreement in accommodative response measurements.
    Antona B; Sanchez I; Barrio A; Barra F; Gonzalez E
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2009 Nov; 29(6):606-14. PubMed ID: 19663924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of target distance on accommodative amplitude measured using the minus lens technique.
    Momeni-Moghaddam H; Wolffsohn JS; Azimi A; Babaei-Malekkolaei E
    Clin Exp Optom; 2014 Jan; 97(1):62-5. PubMed ID: 23889500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accommodative amplitude using the minus lens at different near distances.
    Momeni-Moghaddam H; Ng JS; Cesana BM; Yekta AA; Sedaghat MR
    Indian J Ophthalmol; 2017 Mar; 65(3):223-227. PubMed ID: 28440251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Amplitude of Accommodation among Students of a Malaysian Private University as Assessed Using Subjective and Objective Techniques.
    Majumder C; Afnan H
    Korean J Ophthalmol; 2020 Jun; 34(3):219-226. PubMed ID: 32495530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparing Different Methods of Measuring Accommodative Amplitude with Hofstetter's Normative Values in a Ghanaian Population.
    Abu EK; Ocansey S; Yennu J; Asirifi I; Marfo R
    Curr Eye Res; 2018 Sep; 43(9):1145-1150. PubMed ID: 29787692
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Accommodation measurements in a prepresbyopic and presbyopic population.
    Ostrin LA; Glasser A
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2004 Jul; 30(7):1435-44. PubMed ID: 15210220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Age and the amplitude of accommodation measured using dynamic retinoscopy.
    León A; Estrada JM; Rosenfield M
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2016 Jan; 36(1):5-12. PubMed ID: 26353999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Subjective and objective measurement of human accommodative amplitude.
    Wold JE; Hu A; Chen S; Glasser A
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2003 Oct; 29(10):1878-88. PubMed ID: 14604706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Repeatability of the amplitude of accommodation measured by a new generation autorefractor.
    Weng CC; Hwang DK; Liu CJ
    PLoS One; 2020; 15(1):e0224733. PubMed ID: 31986151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Objective accommodation measurements in pseudophakic subjects using an autorefractor and an aberrometer.
    Win-Hall DM; Glasser A
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2009 Feb; 35(2):282-90. PubMed ID: 19185244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Subjective versus objective accommodative amplitude: preschool to presbyopia.
    Anderson HA; Stuebing KK
    Optom Vis Sci; 2014 Nov; 91(11):1290-301. PubMed ID: 25602235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of three monocular methods for measuring accommodative stimulus-response curves.
    Chen Y; Jin W; Zheng Z; Zhang C; Lin H; Drobe B; Bao J; Chen H
    Clin Exp Optom; 2017 Mar; 100(2):155-161. PubMed ID: 27813170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Repeatability of the modified Thorington card used to measure far heterophoria.
    Cebrian JL; Antona B; Barrio A; Gonzalez E; Gutierrez A; Sanchez I
    Optom Vis Sci; 2014 Jul; 91(7):786-92. PubMed ID: 24901486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effect of heterophoria measurement technique on the clinical accommodative convergence to accommodation ratio.
    Escalante JB; Rosenfield M
    Optometry; 2006 May; 77(5):229-34. PubMed ID: 16651213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of the Amplitude of Accommodation Measured Using a New-Generation Closed-Field Autorefractor with Conventional Subjective Methods.
    Kanclerz P; Pluta K; Momeni-Moghaddam H; Khoramnia R
    Diagnostics (Basel); 2022 Feb; 12(3):. PubMed ID: 35328121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.