218 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20457977)
1. The effective dynamic ranges of standard automated perimetry sizes III and V and motion and matrix perimetry.
Wall M; Woodward KR; Doyle CK; Zamba G
Arch Ophthalmol; 2010 May; 128(5):570-6. PubMed ID: 20457977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Repeatability of automated perimetry: a comparison between standard automated perimetry with stimulus size III and V, matrix, and motion perimetry.
Wall M; Woodward KR; Doyle CK; Artes PH
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2009 Feb; 50(2):974-9. PubMed ID: 18952921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma.
Artes PH; Hutchison DM; Nicolela MT; LeBlanc RP; Chauhan BC
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Jul; 46(7):2451-7. PubMed ID: 15980235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The Effective Dynamic Ranges for Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression With Standard Automated Perimetry and Stimulus Sizes III and V.
Wall M; Zamba GKD; Artes PH
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2018 Jan; 59(1):439-445. PubMed ID: 29356822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Size threshold perimetry performs as well as conventional automated perimetry with stimulus sizes III, V, and VI for glaucomatous loss.
Wall M; Doyle CK; Eden T; Zamba KD; Johnson CA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2013 Jun; 54(6):3975-83. PubMed ID: 23633660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Total deviation probability plots for stimulus size v perimetry: a comparison with size III stimuli.
Wall M; Brito CF; Woodward KR; Doyle CK; Kardon RH; Johnson CA
Arch Ophthalmol; 2008 Apr; 126(4):473-9. PubMed ID: 18413515
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Visual field progression with frequency-doubling matrix perimetry and standard automated perimetry in patients with glaucoma and in healthy controls.
Redmond T; O'Leary N; Hutchison DM; Nicolela MT; Artes PH; Chauhan BC
JAMA Ophthalmol; 2013 Dec; 131(12):1565-72. PubMed ID: 24177807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Variability components of standard automated perimetry and frequency-doubling technology perimetry.
Spry PG; Johnson CA; McKendrick AM; Turpin A
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2001 May; 42(6):1404-10. PubMed ID: 11328758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of standard automated perimetry, frequency-doubling technology perimetry, and short-wavelength automated perimetry for detection of glaucoma.
Liu S; Lam S; Weinreb RN; Ye C; Cheung CY; Lai G; Lam DS; Leung CK
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2011 Sep; 52(10):7325-31. PubMed ID: 21810975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparing multifocal VEP and standard automated perimetry in high-risk ocular hypertension and early glaucoma.
Fortune B; Demirel S; Zhang X; Hood DC; Patterson E; Jamil A; Mansberger SL; Cioffi GA; Johnson CA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2007 Mar; 48(3):1173-80. PubMed ID: 17325161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Variability in patients with glaucomatous visual field damage is reduced using size V stimuli.
Wall M; Kutzko KE; Chauhan BC
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1997 Feb; 38(2):426-35. PubMed ID: 9040476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Influence of multifocal intraocular lenses on standard automated perimetry test results.
Aychoua N; Junoy Montolio FG; Jansonius NM
JAMA Ophthalmol; 2013 Apr; 131(4):481-5. PubMed ID: 23430147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Frequency-doubling technology perimetry for detection of the development of visual field defects in glaucoma suspect eyes: a prospective study.
Liu S; Yu M; Weinreb RN; Lai G; Lam DS; Leung CK
JAMA Ophthalmol; 2014 Jan; 132(1):77-83. PubMed ID: 24177945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Frequency doubling technology perimetry for detection of visual field progression in glaucoma: a pointwise linear regression analysis.
Liu S; Yu M; Weinreb RN; Lai G; Lam DS; Leung CK
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2014 May; 55(5):2862-9. PubMed ID: 24595388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Properties of perimetric threshold estimates from Full Threshold, SITA Standard, and SITA Fast strategies.
Artes PH; Iwase A; Ohno Y; Kitazawa Y; Chauhan BC
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2002 Aug; 43(8):2654-9. PubMed ID: 12147599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Reclaiming the Periphery: Automated Kinetic Perimetry for Measuring Peripheral Visual Fields in Patients With Glaucoma.
Mönter VM; Crabb DP; Artes PH
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2017 Feb; 58(2):868-875. PubMed ID: 28159974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The repeatability of mean defect with size III and size V standard automated perimetry.
Wall M; Doyle CK; Zamba KD; Artes P; Johnson CA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2013 Feb; 54(2):1345-51. PubMed ID: 23341012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Diagnostic sensitivity of fast blue-yellow and standard automated perimetry in early glaucoma: a comparison between different test programs.
Bengtsson B; Heijl A
Ophthalmology; 2006 Jul; 113(7):1092-7. PubMed ID: 16815399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Frequency-doubling threshold perimetry in predicting glaucoma in a population-based study: The Beijing Eye Study.
Wang YX; Xu L; Zhang RX; Jonas JB
Arch Ophthalmol; 2007 Oct; 125(10):1402-6. PubMed ID: 17923550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
