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 *

336 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18992269)

  • 1. The effect of modulating ocular depth of focus upon accommodation microfluctuations in myopic and emmetropic subjects.
    Day M; Seidel D; Gray LS; Strang NC
    Vision Res; 2009 Jan; 49(2):211-8. PubMed ID: 18992269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The relationship between object spatial profile and accommodation microfluctuations in emmetropes and myopes.
    Day M; Gray LS; Seidel D; Strang NC
    J Vis; 2009 Sep; 9(10):5.1-13. PubMed ID: 19810786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Refractive group differences in accommodation microfluctuations with changing accommodation stimulus.
    Day M; Strang NC; Seidel D; Gray LS; Mallen EA
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2006 Jan; 26(1):88-96. PubMed ID: 16390487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Objective depth-of-focus is different from subjective depth-of-focus and correlated with accommodative microfluctuations.
    Yao P; Lin H; Huang J; Chu R; Jiang BC
    Vision Res; 2010 Jun; 50(13):1266-73. PubMed ID: 20399223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Variability of the accommodation response in early onset myopia.
    Langaas T; Riddell PM; Svarverud E; Ystenaes AE; Langeggen I; Bruenech JR
    Optom Vis Sci; 2008 Jan; 85(1):37-48. PubMed ID: 18174839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Technical note: effect of contact lenses on measurement of the accommodation microfluctuations.
    Day M; Strang NC; Seidel D; Gray LS
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2008 Jan; 28(1):91-5. PubMed ID: 18201340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Stimulating human accommodation without changes in focus.
    Weiss M; Seidemann A; Schaeffel F
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2004 May; 24(3):207-17. PubMed ID: 15130169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Accommodation steps, target spatial frequency and refractive error.
    Strang NC; Day M; Gray LS; Seidel D
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2011 Sep; 31(5):444-55. PubMed ID: 21651598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The effects of spatial frequency on the accommodation responses of myopes and emmetropes under various detection demands.
    Xu J; Zheng Z; Drobe B; Jiang J; Chen H
    Vision Res; 2015 Oct; 115(Pt A):1-7. PubMed ID: 26218290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Transient Axial Length Change during the Accommodation Response in Young Adults.
    Mallen EA; Kashyap P; Hampson KM
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Mar; 47(3):1251-4. PubMed ID: 16505066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Open-loop accommodation in emmetropia and myopia.
    Strang NC; Gilmartin BS; Gray LS; Winfield NR; Winn B
    Curr Eye Res; 2000 Mar; 20(3):190-4. PubMed ID: 10694894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Optimizing the subjective depth-of-focus with combinations of fourth- and sixth-order spherical aberration.
    Benard Y; Lopez-Gil N; Legras R
    Vision Res; 2011 Dec; 51(23-24):2471-7. PubMed ID: 22019797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Blur Detection, Depth of Field, and Accommodation in Emmetropic and Hyperopic Children.
    Roberts TL; Stevenson SB; Benoit JS; Manny RE; Anderson HA
    Optom Vis Sci; 2018 Mar; 95(3):212-222. PubMed ID: 29401180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Is Pupil Diameter Influenced by Refractive Error?
    Orr JB; Seidel D; Day M; Gray LS
    Optom Vis Sci; 2015 Jul; 92(7):834-40. PubMed ID: 26002005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Objective blur thresholds in free space for different refractive groups.
    Vasudevan B; Ciuffreda KJ; Wang B
    Curr Eye Res; 2006 Feb; 31(2):111-8. PubMed ID: 16500761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Influence of accommodation and refractive status on the peripheral refractive profile.
    Davies LN; Mallen EA
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2009 Sep; 93(9):1186-90. PubMed ID: 19525242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Differences in the accommodation stimulus response curves of adult myopes and emmetropes.
    Abbott ML; Schmid KL; Strang NC
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 1998 Jan; 18(1):13-20. PubMed ID: 9666906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effect of monocular and binocular viewing on the accommodation response to real targets in emmetropia and myopia.
    Seidel D; Gray LS; Heron G
    Optom Vis Sci; 2005 Apr; 82(4):279-85. PubMed ID: 15829856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Accommodation microfluctuations and pupil size during sustained viewing of visual display terminals.
    Gray LS; Gilmartin B; Winn B
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2000 Jan; 20(1):5-10. PubMed ID: 10884926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Stimulus requirements for the decoding of myopic and hyperopic defocus under single and competing defocus conditions in the chicken.
    Diether S; Wildsoet CF
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Jul; 46(7):2242-52. PubMed ID: 15980207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 17.