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.
345 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23632399)
21. Reproducibility of visual field end point criteria for standard automated perimetry, full-threshold, and Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm strategies: diagnostic innovations in glaucoma study. Bourne RR; Jahanbakhsh K; Boden C; Zangwill LM; Hoffmann EM; Medeiros FA; Weinreb RN; Sample PA Am J Ophthalmol; 2007 Dec; 144(6):908-913. PubMed ID: 17919445 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Converting to SITA-standard from full-threshold visual field testing in the follow-up phase of a clinical trial. Musch DC; Gillespie BW; Motyka BM; Niziol LM; Mills RP; Lichter PR Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Aug; 46(8):2755-9. PubMed ID: 16043847 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. A new rapid threshold algorithm for short-wavelength automated perimetry. Bengtsson B Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2003 Mar; 44(3):1388-94. PubMed ID: 12601072 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Comparison of visual field defects using matrix perimetry and standard achromatic perimetry. Patel A; Wollstein G; Ishikawa H; Schuman JS Ophthalmology; 2007 Mar; 114(3):480-7. PubMed ID: 17123623 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Comparison of 30-2 Standard and Fast programs of Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm of Humphrey Field Analyzer for perimetry in patients with intracranial tumors. Singh MD; Jain K Indian J Ophthalmol; 2017 Nov; 65(11):1198-1202. PubMed ID: 29133651 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Comparison of two fast strategies, SITA Fast and TOP, for the assessment of visual fields in glaucoma patients. King AJ; Taguri A; Wadood AC; Azuara-Blanco A Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2002 Jun; 240(6):481-7. PubMed ID: 12107516 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. [Clinical experiences with the "Swedish interactive threshold algorithm" (SITA)]. Remky A; Arend O Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2000 Mar; 216(3):143-7. PubMed ID: 10773977 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Between-algorithm, between-individual differences in normal perimetric sensitivity: full threshold, FASTPAC, and SITA. Swedish Interactive Threshold algorithm. Wild JM; Pacey IE; Hancock SA; Cunliffe IA Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1999 May; 40(6):1152-61. PubMed ID: 10235548 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. A Comparison of the Visual Field Parameters of SITA Faster and SITA Standard Strategies in Glaucoma. Lavanya R; Riyazuddin M; Dasari S; Puttaiah NK; Venugopal JP; Pradhan ZS; Devi S; Sreenivasaiah S; Ganeshrao SB; Rao HL J Glaucoma; 2020 Sep; 29(9):783-788. PubMed ID: 32459685 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Clinical evaluation of SITA: a new family of perimetric testing strategies. Shirato S; Inoue R; Fukushima K; Suzuki Y Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 1999 Jan; 237(1):29-34. PubMed ID: 9951638 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Comparison of the Humphrey swedish interactive thresholding algorithm (SITA) and full threshold strategies. Sharma AK; Goldberg I; Graham SL; Mohsin M J Glaucoma; 2000 Feb; 9(1):20-7. PubMed ID: 10708227 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. Relationship of SITA and full-threshold standard perimetry to frequency-doubling technology perimetry in glaucoma. Boden C; Pascual J; Medeiros FA; Aihara M; Weinreb RN; Sample PA Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Jul; 46(7):2433-9. PubMed ID: 15980232 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Relationship between Humphrey 30-2 SITA Standard Test, Matrix 30-2 threshold test, and Heidelberg retina tomograph in ocular hypertensive and glaucoma patients. Bozkurt B; Yilmaz PT; Irkec M J Glaucoma; 2008; 17(3):203-10. PubMed ID: 18414106 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. 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]
36. 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]
37. Evaluation of a new perimetric threshold strategy, SITA, in patients with manifest and suspect glaucoma. Bengtsson B; Heijl A Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 1998 Jun; 76(3):268-72. PubMed ID: 9686835 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Can Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm fast perimetry be used as an alternative to goldmann perimetry in neuro-ophthalmic practice? Szatmáry G; Biousse V; Newman NJ Arch Ophthalmol; 2002 Sep; 120(9):1162-73. PubMed ID: 12215089 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. A new index to monitor central visual field progression in glaucoma. de Moraes CG; Furlanetto RL; Ritch R; Liebmann JM Ophthalmology; 2014 Aug; 121(8):1531-8. PubMed ID: 24726202 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]