349 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23632399)
1. A comparison of false-negative responses for full threshold and SITA standard perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal observers.
Johnson CA; Sherman K; Doyle C; Wall M
J Glaucoma; 2014; 23(5):288-92. PubMed ID: 23632399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. SITA standard in optic neuropathies and hemianopias: a comparison with full threshold testing.
Wall M; Punke SG; Stickney TL; Brito CF; Withrow KR; Kardon RH
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2001 Feb; 42(2):528-37. PubMed ID: 11157893
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Assessment of false positives with the Humphrey Field Analyzer II perimeter with the SITA Algorithm.
Newkirk MR; Gardiner SK; Demirel S; Johnson CA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Oct; 47(10):4632-7. PubMed ID: 17003461
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?
Conway ML; Hosking SL; Zhu H; Cubbidge RP
BMC Ophthalmol; 2014 Dec; 14():166. PubMed ID: 25539569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The SITA perimetric threshold algorithms in glaucoma.
Wild JM; Pacey IE; O'Neill EC; Cunliffe IA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1999 Aug; 40(9):1998-2009. PubMed ID: 10440254
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A comparison of catch trial methods used in standard automated perimetry in glaucoma patients.
Wall M; Doyle CK; Brito CF; Woodward KR; Johnson CA
J Glaucoma; 2008 Dec; 17(8):626-30. PubMed ID: 19092457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. [Evaluation of the Humphrey perimetry programs SITA Standard and SITA Fast in normal probands and patients with glaucoma].
Nordmann JP; Brion F; Hamard P; Mouton-Chopin D
J Fr Ophtalmol; 1998 Oct; 21(8):549-54. PubMed ID: 9833219
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Role of visual field reliability indices in ruling out glaucoma.
Rao HL; Yadav RK; Begum VU; Addepalli UK; Choudhari NS; Senthil S; Garudadri CS
JAMA Ophthalmol; 2015 Jan; 133(1):40-4. PubMed ID: 25256758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Quantification and Predictors of Visual Field Variability in Healthy, Glaucoma Suspect, and Glaucomatous Eyes Using SITA-Faster.
Tan JCK; Agar A; Kalloniatis M; Phu J
Ophthalmology; 2024 Jun; 131(6):658-666. PubMed ID: 38110124
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Detecting visual function abnormalities using the Swedish interactive threshold algorithm and matrix perimetry in eyes with glaucomatous appearance of the optic disc.
Sakata LM; Deleon-Ortega J; Arthur SN; Monheit BE; Girkin CA
Arch Ophthalmol; 2007 Mar; 125(3):340-5. PubMed ID: 17353404
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Performance of frequency-doubling technology perimetry in a population-based prevalence survey of glaucoma: the Tajimi study.
Iwase A; Tomidokoro A; Araie M; Shirato S; Shimizu H; Kitazawa Y;
Ophthalmology; 2007 Jan; 114(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 17070580
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm for central visual field defects unrelated to nerve fiber layer.
Hirasawa K; Shoji N
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2016 May; 254(5):845-54. PubMed ID: 26279004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluation of threshold estimation and learning effect of two perimetric strategies, SITA Fast and CLIP, in damaged visual fields.
Capris P; Autuori S; Capris E; Papadia M
Eur J Ophthalmol; 2008; 18(2):182-90. PubMed ID: 18320509
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Automated perimetry: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.
Delgado MF; Nguyen NT; Cox TA; Singh K; Lee DA; Dueker DK; Fechtner RD; Juzych MS; Lin SC; Netland PA; Pastor SA; Schuman JS; Samples JR;
Ophthalmology; 2002 Dec; 109(12):2362-74. PubMed ID: 12466186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
