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 *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19606243)

  • 21. Correlation between static automated and scanning laser entoptic perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients.
    Plummer DJ; Lopez A; Azen SP; LaBree L; Bartsch DU; Sadun AA; Freeman WR
    Ophthalmology; 2000 Sep; 107(9):1693-701. PubMed ID: 10964832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Pitfalls of automated perimetry in glaucoma diagnosis.
    Heijl A; Asman P
    Curr Opin Ophthalmol; 1995 Apr; 6(2):46-51. PubMed ID: 10150857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Mozart K.448 and epileptiform discharges: effect of ratio of lower to higher harmonics.
    Lin LC; Lee WT; Wu HC; Tsai CL; Wei RC; Jong YJ; Yang RC
    Epilepsy Res; 2010 May; 89(2-3):238-45. PubMed ID: 20129759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. False-negative responses in glaucoma perimetry: indicators of patient performance or test reliability?
    Bengtsson B; Heijl A
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2000 Jul; 41(8):2201-4. PubMed ID: 10892863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. A comparison of false-negative responses for full threshold and SITA standard perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal observers.
    Johnson CA; Sherman K; Doyle C; Wall M
    J Glaucoma; 2014; 23(5):288-92. PubMed ID: 23632399
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Comparison of Quality and Output of Different Optimal Perimetric Testing Approaches in Children With Glaucoma.
    Patel DE; Cumberland PM; Walters BC; Russell-Eggitt I; Brookes J; Papadopoulos M; Khaw PT; Viswanathan AC; Garway-Heath D; Cortina-Borja M; Rahi JS;
    JAMA Ophthalmol; 2018 Feb; 136(2):155-161. PubMed ID: 29285534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Reliability of computerized perimetric threshold tests as assessed by reliability indices and threshold reproducibility in patients with suspect and manifest glaucoma.
    Bengtsson B
    Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 2000 Oct; 78(5):519-22. PubMed ID: 11037906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The influence of Mozart's sonata K.448 on visual attention: an ERPs study.
    Zhu W; Zhao L; Zhang J; Ding X; Liu H; Ni E; Ma Y; Zhou C
    Neurosci Lett; 2008 Mar; 434(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 18280658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Neurovegetative and Emotional Modulation Induced by Mozart's Music.
    Di Cesare M; Tonacci A; Bondi D; Verratti V; Prete G; Malatesta G; Pietrangelo T
    Neuropsychobiology; 2022; 81(4):322-332. PubMed ID: 35753309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The influence of the learning effect on automated perimetry in a Turkish population.
    Aydin A; Kocak I; Aykan U; Can G; Sabahyildizi M; Ersanli D
    J Fr Ophtalmol; 2015 Sep; 38(7):628-32. PubMed ID: 26111771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of visual field defects using matrix perimetry and standard achromatic perimetry.
    Patel A; Wollstein G; Ishikawa H; Schuman JS
    Ophthalmology; 2007 Mar; 114(3):480-7. PubMed ID: 17123623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Role of visual field reliability indices in ruling out glaucoma.
    Rao HL; Yadav RK; Begum VU; Addepalli UK; Choudhari NS; Senthil S; Garudadri CS
    JAMA Ophthalmol; 2015 Jan; 133(1):40-4. PubMed ID: 25256758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Learning effect of standard automated perimetry in healthy individuals.
    Castro DP; Kawase J; Melo LA
    Arq Bras Oftalmol; 2008; 71(4):523-8. PubMed ID: 18797662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Response properties of normal observers and patients during automated perimetry.
    Nelson-Quigg JM; Twelker JD; Johnson CA
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1989 Nov; 107(11):1612-5. PubMed ID: 2818281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Assessment of an effective visual field testing strategy for a normal pediatric population.
    Akar Y; Yilmaz A; Yucel I
    Ophthalmologica; 2008; 222(5):329-33. PubMed ID: 18617757
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparison of size modulation and conventional standard automated perimetry with the 24-2 test protocol in glaucoma patients.
    Hirasawa K; Shoji N; Kasahara M; Matsumura K; Shimizu K
    Sci Rep; 2016 May; 6():25563. PubMed ID: 27149561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Assessment of false positives with the Humphrey Field Analyzer II perimeter with the SITA Algorithm.
    Newkirk MR; Gardiner SK; Demirel S; Johnson CA
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Oct; 47(10):4632-7. PubMed ID: 17003461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Mozart K.448 acts as a potential add-on therapy in children with refractory epilepsy.
    Lin LC; Lee WT; Wang CH; Chen HL; Wu HC; Tsai CL; Wei RC; Mok HK; Weng CF; Lee MW; Yang RC
    Epilepsy Behav; 2011 Mar; 20(3):490-3. PubMed ID: 21292560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Threshold Automated Perimetry of the Full Visual Field in Patients With Glaucoma With Mild Visual Loss.
    Wall M; Lee EJ; Wanzek RJ; Zamba KD; Turpin A; Chong LX; Marin-Franch I
    J Glaucoma; 2019 Nov; 28(11):997-1005. PubMed ID: 31567907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Comparison between indices of Humphrey matrix and Humphrey perimetry in early glaucoma patients and normal subjects.
    Hong S; Yeom HY; Kim CY; Seong GJ
    Ann Ophthalmol (Skokie); 2007; 39(4):318-20. PubMed ID: 18025653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.