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 *

242 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23424970)

  • 1. [Comparison between subtraction skin electrodes and corneal-contact electrodes in flash electroretinograms].
    Kaid T; Matsunag M; Hanaya J; Nakamura Y; Ohtani S; Miyat K; Kondo M
    Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi; 2013 Jan; 117(1):5-11. PubMed ID: 23424970
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of ERGs recorded with skin and corneal-contact electrodes in normal children and adults.
    Bradshaw K; Hansen R; Fulton A
    Doc Ophthalmol; 2004 Jul; 109(1):43-55. PubMed ID: 15675199
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Accuracy and results of photopic flash electroretinogram performed with skin electrodes in infants.
    Bui Quoc E; Albuisson E; Ingster-Moati I
    Eur J Ophthalmol; 2012; 22(3):441-9. PubMed ID: 21748726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of different recording parameters to establish a standard for flash electroretinography in rodents.
    Bayer AU; Cook P; Brodie SE; Maag KP; Mittag T
    Vision Res; 2001 Aug; 41(17):2173-85. PubMed ID: 11448710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Qualitative and quantitative comparison of ERGs with contact lens and adhesive skin electrodes.
    Chen D; Greenstein VC; Brodie SE
    Doc Ophthalmol; 2022 Jun; 144(3):203-215. PubMed ID: 35304683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Spatial differences in corneal electroretinogram potentials measured in rat with a contact lens electrode array.
    Krakova Y; Tajalli H; Thongpang S; Derafshi Z; Ban T; Rahmani S; Selner AN; Al-Tarouti A; Williams JC; Hetling JR
    Doc Ophthalmol; 2014 Dec; 129(3):151-66. PubMed ID: 25266461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparing DTL microfiber and Neuroline skin electrode in the Mini Ganzfeld ERG.
    Lapkovska A; Palmowski-Wolfe AM; Todorova MG
    BMC Ophthalmol; 2016 Aug; 16():137. PubMed ID: 27491453
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Dark-adapted luminance-response functions with skin and corneal electrodes.
    Wali N; Leguire LE
    Doc Ophthalmol; 1991; 76(4):367-75. PubMed ID: 1935545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of performance and patient satisfaction of two types of ERG electrodes.
    Beeler P; Barthelmes D; Sutter FK; Helbig H; Fleischhauer JC
    Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2007 Apr; 224(4):265-8. PubMed ID: 17458789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Corneal Potential Maps Measured With Multi-Electrode Electroretinography in Rat Eyes With Experimental Lesions.
    Derafshi Z; Kunzer BE; Mugler EM; Rokhmanova N; Park DW; Tajalli H; Shetty K; Ma Z; Williams JC; Hetling JR
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2017 Jun; 58(7):2863-2873. PubMed ID: 28586910
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Skin ERGs: their effectiveness in paediatric visual assessment, confounding factors, and comparison with ERGs recorded using various types of corneal electrode.
    Kriss A
    Int J Psychophysiol; 1994 May; 16(2-3):137-46. PubMed ID: 8089032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of varying skin surface electrode position on electroretinogram responses recorded using a handheld stimulating and recording system.
    Hobby AE; Kozareva D; Yonova-Doing E; Hossain IT; Katta M; Huntjens B; Hammond CJ; Binns AM; Mahroo OA
    Doc Ophthalmol; 2018 Oct; 137(2):79-86. PubMed ID: 30046929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of guinea pig electroretinograms measured with bipolar corneal and unipolar intravitreal electrodes.
    Bui BV; Weisinger HS; Sinclair AJ; Vingrys AJ
    Doc Ophthalmol; 1998; 95(1):15-34. PubMed ID: 10189179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Studies on skin-electrode ERG in the closed-eye state.
    Uchida K; Mitsuyu-Tsuboi M; Honda Y
    J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus; 1979; 16(1):62-5. PubMed ID: 438933
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A novel method to reduce noise in electroretinography using skin electrodes: a study of noise level, inter-session variability, and reproducibility.
    Yamashita T; Miki A; Tabuchi A; Funada H; Kondo M
    Int Ophthalmol; 2017 Apr; 37(2):317-324. PubMed ID: 27278187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparison of flash electroretinograms recorded from Burian Allen, JET, C-glide, gold foil, DTL and skin electrodes.
    Esakowitz L; Kriss A; Shawkat F
    Eye (Lond); 1993; 7 ( Pt 1)():169-71. PubMed ID: 8325411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison between Dawson, Trick, and Litzkow electrode and contact lens electrodes used in clinical electroretinography.
    Kuze M; Uji Y
    Jpn J Ophthalmol; 2000; 44(4):374-80. PubMed ID: 10974293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Validation of a new fiber electrode prototype for clinical electroretinography.
    Berezovsky A; Pereira JM; Salomão SR; Santos VR; Schor P
    Arq Bras Oftalmol; 2008; 71(3):316-20. PubMed ID: 18641814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [AC and DC electroretinography in degenerative retinal diseases].
    Kellner U; Foerster MH
    Fortschr Ophthalmol; 1990; 87(2):196-200. PubMed ID: 2358278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Monitoring the effect of mild ischemia with a built-in light-emitting diode contact lens electrode and a low-cost custom-made apparatus.
    Fleischman A; Parvari U; Oron Y; Geyer O
    Physiol Meas; 2012 Jun; 33(6):1053-2. PubMed ID: 22561091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.