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.
197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21478785)
1. Measuring visual function in age-related macular degeneration with frequency-doubling (matrix) perimetry. Anderson AJ; Johnson CA; Werner JS Optom Vis Sci; 2011 Jul; 88(7):806-15. PubMed ID: 21478785 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of Humphrey MATRIX and Swedish interactive threshold algorithm standard strategy in detecting early glaucomatous visual field loss. Prema R; George R; Hemamalini A; Sathyamangalam Ve R; Baskaran M; Vijaya L Indian J Ophthalmol; 2009; 57(3):207-11. PubMed ID: 19384015 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of Matrix with Humphrey Field Analyzer II with SITA. Fredette MJ; Giguère A; Anderson DR; Budenz DL; McSoley J Optom Vis Sci; 2015 May; 92(5):527-36. PubMed ID: 25875683 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Correlation between high-pass resolution perimetry and standard threshold perimetry in subjects with glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Iester M; Capris P; Altieri M; Zingirian M; Traverso CE Int Ophthalmol; 1999; 23(2):99-103. PubMed ID: 11196128 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Characteristics of visual loss by scanning laser ophthalmoscope microperimetry in eyes with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration. Fujii GY; De Juan E; Humayun MS; Sunness JS; Chang TS; Rossi JV Am J Ophthalmol; 2003 Dec; 136(6):1067-78. PubMed ID: 14644217 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of VEP perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. Bengtsson B Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 2002 Dec; 80(6):620-6. PubMed ID: 12485283 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of Perimetric Outcomes from a Tablet Perimeter, Smart Visual Function Analyzer, and Humphrey Field Analyzer. Kang J; De Arrigunaga S; Freeman SE; Zhao Y; Lin M; Liebman DL; Roldan AM; Kim JA; Chang DS; Friedman DS; Elze T Ophthalmol Glaucoma; 2023; 6(5):509-520. PubMed ID: 36918066 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Quantification of visual field loss in age-related macular degeneration. Acton JH; Gibson JM; Cubbidge RP PLoS One; 2012; 7(6):e39944. PubMed ID: 22768178 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Detection of glaucomatous visual field defect by nonconventional perimetry. Iester M; Altieri M; Vittone P; Calabria G; Zingirian M; Traverso CE Am J Ophthalmol; 2003 Jan; 135(1):35-9. PubMed ID: 12504694 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Multicenter Comparison of the Toronto Portable Perimeter with the Humphrey Field Analyzer: A Pilot Study. Ahmed Y; Pereira A; Bowden S; Shi RB; Li Y; Ahmed IIK; Arshinoff SA Ophthalmol Glaucoma; 2022; 5(2):146-159. PubMed ID: 34358734 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Increased Depth, Reduced Extent, and Sharpened Edges of Visual Field Defects Measured by Compass Fundus Perimeter Compared to Humphrey Field Analyzer. Liu P; Nguyen BN; Turpin A; McKendrick AM Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2021 Oct; 10(12):33. PubMed ID: 34694332 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of detectability of visual field abnormality by frequency doubling technology in primary open-angle glaucoma and normal-tension glaucoma. Horikoshi N; Osako M; Tamura Y; Okano T; Usui M Jpn J Ophthalmol; 2001; 45(5):503-9. PubMed ID: 11583674 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Conventional perimetry, short-wavelength automated perimetry, frequency-doubling technology, and visual evoked potentials in the assessment of patients with multiple sclerosis. Corallo G; Cicinelli S; Papadia M; Bandini F; Uccelli A; Calabria G Eur J Ophthalmol; 2005; 15(6):730-8. PubMed ID: 16329058 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison and Correlation of Retinal Sensitivity Between Microperimetry and Standard Automated Perimetry in Low-tension Glaucoma. Tepelus TC; Song S; Nittala MG; Nassisi M; Sadda SR; Chopra V J Glaucoma; 2020 Oct; 29(10):975-980. PubMed ID: 32649448 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Influence of laser photocoagulation for clinically significant diabetic macular oedema (DMO) on short-wavelength and conventional automated perimetry. Hudson C; Flanagan JG; Turner GS; Chen HC; Young LB; McLeod D Diabetologia; 1998 Nov; 41(11):1283-92. PubMed ID: 9833934 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Properties of Visual Field Defects Around the Monocular Preferred Retinal Locus in Age-Related Macular Degeneration. Denniss J; Baggaley HC; Brown GM; Rubin GS; Astle AT Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2017 May; 58(5):2652-2658. PubMed ID: 28524928 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Validation of a Head-mounted Virtual Reality Visual Field Screening Device. Mees L; Upadhyaya S; Kumar P; Kotawala S; Haran S; Rajasekar S; Friedman DS; Venkatesh R J Glaucoma; 2020 Feb; 29(2):86-91. PubMed ID: 31790067 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Agreement between frequency doubling perimetry and static perimetry in eyes with high tension glaucoma and normal tension glaucoma. Kogure S; Toda Y; Crabb D; Kashiwagi K; Fitzke FW; Tsukahara S Br J Ophthalmol; 2003 May; 87(5):604-8. PubMed ID: 12714404 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A Comparison between the Compass Fundus Perimeter and the Humphrey Field Analyzer. Montesano G; Bryan SR; Crabb DP; Fogagnolo P; Oddone F; McKendrick AM; Turpin A; Lanzetta P; Perdicchi A; Johnson CA; Garway-Heath DF; Brusini P; Rossetti LM Ophthalmology; 2019 Feb; 126(2):242-251. PubMed ID: 30114416 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Six-month Longitudinal Comparison of a Portable Tablet Perimeter With the Humphrey Field Analyzer. Prea SM; Kong YXG; Mehta A; He M; Crowston JG; Gupta V; Martin KR; Vingrys AJ Am J Ophthalmol; 2018 Jun; 190():9-16. PubMed ID: 29550190 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]