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: 22856469)

  • 1. Comparison of the monocular Humphrey Visual Field and the binocular Humphrey Esterman Visual Field test for driver licensing in glaucoma subjects in Sweden.
    Ayala M
    BMC Ophthalmol; 2012 Aug; 12():35. PubMed ID: 22856469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Sensitivity and specificity of the Swedish interactive threshold algorithm for glaucomatous visual field defects.
    Budenz DL; Rhee P; Feuer WJ; McSoley J; Johnson CA; Anderson DR
    Ophthalmology; 2002 Jun; 109(6):1052-8. PubMed ID: 12045043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Distribution and Progression of Visual Field Defects With Binocular Vision in Glaucoma.
    Hashimoto S; Matsumoto C; Eura M; Okuyama S; Nomoto H; Tanabe F; Kayazawa T; Iwase A; Shimomura Y
    J Glaucoma; 2018 Jun; 27(6):519-524. PubMed ID: 29557827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Utility of CLOCK CHART binocular edition for self-checking the binocular visual field in patients with glaucoma.
    Ishibashi M; Matsumoto C; Hashimoto S; Eura M; Okuyama S; Nomoto H; Tanabe F; Kayazawa T; Numata T; Kusaka S
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2019 Nov; 103(11):1672-1676. PubMed ID: 30636206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. What do patients with glaucoma see: a novel iPad app to improve glaucoma patient awareness of visual field loss.
    Gagrani M; Ndulue J; Anderson D; Kedar S; Gulati V; Shepherd J; High R; Smith L; Fowler Z; Khazanchi D; Nawrot M; Ghate D
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2022 Feb; 106(2):218-222. PubMed ID: 33218992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Detecting early to mild glaucomatous damage: a comparison of the multifocal VEP and automated perimetry.
    Hood DC; Thienprasiddhi P; Greenstein VC; Winn BJ; Ohri N; Liebmann JM; Ritch R
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2004 Feb; 45(2):492-8. PubMed ID: 14744890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Multifocal VEP and ganglion cell damage: applications and limitations for the study of glaucoma.
    Hood DC; Greenstein VC
    Prog Retin Eye Res; 2003 Mar; 22(2):201-51. PubMed ID: 12604058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Integrated visual fields: a new approach to measuring the binocular field of view and visual disability.
    Crabb DP; Viswanathan AC
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2005 Mar; 243(3):210-6. PubMed ID: 15806374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The performance of iPad-based noise-field perimeter versus Humphrey Field Analyser in detecting glaucomatous visual field loss.
    Ding J; Tecson IC; Ang BCH; Chiew W; Chua C; Yip LWL
    Eye (Lond); 2022 Apr; 36(4):800-811. PubMed ID: 33879855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of an automated confrontation testing device versus finger counting in the detection of field loss.
    Bass SJ; Cooper J; Feldman J; Horn D
    Optometry; 2007 Aug; 78(8):390-5. PubMed ID: 17662927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Performance of iPad-based threshold perimetry in glaucoma and controls.
    Schulz AM; Graham EC; You Y; Klistorner A; Graham SL
    Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2018 May; 46(4):346-355. PubMed ID: 28976067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of glaucomatous visual field defects using standard full threshold and Swedish interactive threshold algorithms.
    Budenz DL; Rhee P; Feuer WJ; McSoley J; Johnson CA; Anderson DR
    Arch Ophthalmol; 2002 Sep; 120(9):1136-41. PubMed ID: 12215086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Visual field defects and multifocal visual evoked potentials: evidence of a linear relationship.
    Hood DC; Greenstein VC; Odel JG; Zhang X; Ritch R; Liebmann JM; Hong JE; Chen CS; Thienprasiddhi P
    Arch Ophthalmol; 2002 Dec; 120(12):1672-81. PubMed ID: 12470141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Simulating binocular visual field status in glaucoma.
    Crabb DP; Viswanathan AC; McNaught AI; Poinoosawmy D; Fitzke FW; Hitchings RA
    Br J Ophthalmol; 1998 Nov; 82(11):1236-41. PubMed ID: 9924324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Pilot study comparing a new virtual reality-based visual field test to standard perimetry in children.
    Mesfin Y; Kong A; Backus BT; Deiner M; Ou Y; Oatts JT
    J AAPOS; 2024 Jun; 28(3):103933. PubMed ID: 38729256
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The correlation between glaucomatous visual field loss and vision-related quality of life.
    Orta AÖ; Öztürker ZK; Erkul SÖ; Bayraktar Ş; Yilmaz OF
    J Glaucoma; 2015; 24(5):e121-7. PubMed ID: 25642814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Glaucoma diagnostics.
    Geimer SA
    Acta Ophthalmol; 2013 Feb; 91 Thesis 1():1-32. PubMed ID: 23384049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluating a visual field screening test for glaucoma: how the choice of the gold standard affects the validity of the test.
    Ellish NJ; Higginbotham EJ
    Ophthalmic Epidemiol; 2001 Dec; 8(5):297-307. PubMed ID: 11922383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. M&S Smart System Contrast Sensitivity Measurements Compared With Standard Visual Function Measurements in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Patients.
    Liu JL; McAnany JJ; Wilensky JT; Aref AA; Vajaranant TS
    J Glaucoma; 2017 Jun; 26(6):528-533. PubMed ID: 28333894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.