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 *

134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2023736)

  • 21. A multicenter comparison study of the Humphrey Field Analyzer I and the Humphrey Field Analyzer II.
    Johnson CA; Cioffi GA; Drance SM; Gaasterland D; Mills RP; Ashburn F; Hnik P; Van Coevorden RE
    Ophthalmology; 1997 Nov; 104(11):1910-7. PubMed ID: 9373125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Impact of Different Visual Field Instruction Strategies on Reliability Indices.
    Rao A; Sarangi SP; Padhy D; Raj N; Das G
    Semin Ophthalmol; 2018; 33(5):683-689. PubMed ID: 29256766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Confirmation of visual field abnormalities in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study. Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study Group.
    Keltner JL; Johnson CA; Quigg JM; Cello KE; Kass MA; Gordon MO
    Arch Ophthalmol; 2000 Sep; 118(9):1187-94. PubMed ID: 10980763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Visual field progression in glaucoma: what is the specificity of the Guided Progression Analysis?
    Artes PH; O'Leary N; Nicolela MT; Chauhan BC; Crabb DP
    Ophthalmology; 2014 Oct; 121(10):2023-7. PubMed ID: 24878173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Comparison of the oculokinetic perimetry glaucoma screener with two types of visual field analyser.
    Greve M; Chisholm IA
    Can J Ophthalmol; 1993 Aug; 28(5):201-6. PubMed ID: 8221366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Full threshold versus quantification of defects for visual field testing in glaucoma.
    Stewart WC; Shields MB; Ollie AR
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 1989; 227(1):51-4. PubMed ID: 2646176
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The influence of patient reliability on visual field outcome.
    Lee M; Zulauf M; Caprioli J
    Am J Ophthalmol; 1994 Jun; 117(6):756-61. PubMed ID: 8198159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Effect of intermittent versus continuous patient monitoring on reliability indices during automated perimetry.
    Johnson LN; Aminlari A; Sassani JW
    Ophthalmology; 1993 Jan; 100(1):76-84. PubMed ID: 8433832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Evaluation of the Humphrey FASTPAC threshold program in glaucoma.
    O'Brien C; Poinoosawmy D; Wu J; Hitchings R
    Br J Ophthalmol; 1994 Jul; 78(7):516-9. PubMed ID: 7918261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Detection of glaucomatous visual field defect using a screening program of Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Hong C; Song KY; Youn DH; Park WH
    Korean J Ophthalmol; 1990 Jun; 4(1):23-5. PubMed ID: 2214247
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Number of stimuli as a reliability parameter in perimetry.
    Zulauf M; Caprioli J; Boeglin RJ; Lee M
    Ger J Ophthalmol; 1992; 1(2):86-90. PubMed ID: 1477631
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Evaluating several sources of variability for standard and SWAP visual fields in glaucoma patients, suspects, and normals.
    Blumenthal EZ; Sample PA; Berry CC; Lee AC; Girkin CA; Zangwill L; Caprioli J; Weinreb RN
    Ophthalmology; 2003 Oct; 110(10):1895-902. PubMed ID: 14522760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Blue-on-yellow perimetry can predict the development of glaucomatous visual field loss.
    Johnson CA; Adams AJ; Casson EJ; Brandt JD
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1993 May; 111(5):645-50. PubMed ID: 8489447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effect of eye testing order on automated perimetry results using the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm standard 24-2.
    Barkana Y; Gerber Y; Mora R; Liebmann JM; Ritch R
    Arch Ophthalmol; 2006 Jun; 124(6):781-4. PubMed ID: 16769830
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The ability of healthy volunteers to simulate a neurologic field defect on automated perimetry.
    Ghate D; Bodnarchuk B; Sanders S; Deokule S; Kedar S
    Ophthalmology; 2014 Mar; 121(3):759-62. PubMed ID: 24314835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Relationship between Humphrey 30-2 SITA Standard Test, Matrix 30-2 threshold test, and Heidelberg retina tomograph in ocular hypertensive and glaucoma patients.
    Bozkurt B; Yilmaz PT; Irkec M
    J Glaucoma; 2008; 17(3):203-10. PubMed ID: 18414106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Continuous visual field test supervision may not always be necessary.
    Van Coevorden RE; Mills RP; Chen YY; Barnebey HS
    Ophthalmology; 1999 Jan; 106(1):178-81. PubMed ID: 9917801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Comparison of reliability indices in conventional and high-pass resolution perimetry.
    Chauhan BC; Mohandas RN; Whelan JH; McCormick TA
    Ophthalmology; 1993 Jul; 100(7):1089-94. PubMed ID: 8321533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Visual function-specific perimetry for indirect comparison of different ganglion cell populations in glaucoma.
    Sample PA; Bosworth CF; Blumenthal EZ; Girkin C; Weinreb RN
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2000 Jun; 41(7):1783-90. PubMed ID: 10845599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Objective perimetry in glaucoma.
    Klistorner A; Graham SL
    Ophthalmology; 2000 Dec; 107(12):2283-99. PubMed ID: 11097611
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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