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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25768387)

  • 1. Reproducibility of dynamic Scheimpflug-based pneumotonometer and its correlation with a dynamic bidirectional pneumotonometry device: methodological issues.
    Sabour S
    Cornea; 2015 May; 34(5):e14-5. PubMed ID: 25768387
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Repeatability, reproducibility, and age dependency of dynamic Scheimpflug-based pneumotonometer and its correlation with a dynamic bidirectional pneumotonometry device.
    Bak-Nielsen S; Pedersen IB; Ivarsen A; Hjortdal J
    Cornea; 2015 Jan; 34(1):71-7. PubMed ID: 25393092
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Reply: To PMID 25393092.
    Hjortdal J; Pedersen IB; Bak-Nielsen S; Ivarsen A
    Cornea; 2015 May; 34(5):e15. PubMed ID: 25822376
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Corneal mechanical stiffness and its effect on tonometry.
    Elsheikh A
    J Glaucoma; 2012; 21(4):277-8. PubMed ID: 22466152
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A new noncontact tonometer using corneal photoelasticity: porcine eye study.
    Hwang H; Kim M; Park C
    Ophthalmic Res; 2011; 45(4):169-73. PubMed ID: 20948240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Goldmann applanation tonometry and dynamic contour tonometry after treatment with prostaglandin analog/prostamide.
    Ang GS; Wells AP
    J Glaucoma; 2010; 19(5):346; author reply 347. PubMed ID: 20543630
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Determining corneal hysteresis and preexisting intraocular pressure.
    Sergienko N; Shargorodska I
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2009 Nov; 35(11):2033-4; author reply 2034-5. PubMed ID: 19878850
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Measuring intraocular pressure.
    Okafor KC; Brandt JD
    Curr Opin Ophthalmol; 2015 Mar; 26(2):103-9. PubMed ID: 25594767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A cross-sectional study to compare intraocular pressure measurement by sequential use of Goldman applanation tonometry, dynamic contour tonometry, ocular response analyzer, and Corvis ST.
    Tejwani S; Dinakaran S; Joshi A; Shetty R; Sinha Roy A
    Indian J Ophthalmol; 2015 Nov; 63(11):815-20. PubMed ID: 26669331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Ocular response analyzer and goldmann applanation tonometry: a comparative study of findings.
    Bayoumi NH; Bessa AS; El Massry AA
    J Glaucoma; 2010 Dec; 19(9):627-31. PubMed ID: 20179628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Goldmann applanation tonometer versus ocular response analyzer for measuring intraocular pressure after congenital cataract surgery.
    Feizi S; Faramarzi A; Kheiri B
    Eur J Ophthalmol; 2018 Sep; 28(5):582-589. PubMed ID: 30246567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. [Indentation of the cornea and tonometry. Registration of the T-forces].
    Stepanik J
    Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 1989 Oct; 195(4):239-42. PubMed ID: 2586001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Corneal biomechanics as a function of intraocular pressure and pachymetry by dynamic infrared signal and Scheimpflug imaging analysis in normal eyes.
    Huseynova T; Waring GO; Roberts C; Krueger RR; Tomita M
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2014 Apr; 157(4):885-93. PubMed ID: 24388837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Measurement repeatability of the dynamic Scheimpflug analyzer.
    Miki A; Maeda N; Asai T; Ikuno Y; Nishida K
    Jpn J Ophthalmol; 2017 Nov; 61(6):433-440. PubMed ID: 28983780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. STUDIES IN OCULAR RIGIDITY.
    Saiduzzafar H
    Br J Ophthalmol; 1962 Dec; 46(12):717-29. PubMed ID: 18170842
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Dynamic contour tonometry and goldman applanation tonometry: correlation with intracameral assessment of intraocular pressure.
    Riva I; Quaranta L; Russo A; Katsanos A; Rulli E; Floriani I
    Eur J Ophthalmol; 2012; 22(1):55-62. PubMed ID: 21983891
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Intraocular pressure and biomechanical corneal properties measure by ocular response analyser in patients with primary congenital glaucoma.
    Perucho-González L; Martínez de la Casa JM; Morales-Fernández L; Bañeros-Rojas P; Saenz-Francés F; García-Feijoó J
    Acta Ophthalmol; 2016 Aug; 94(5):e293-7. PubMed ID: 26647905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. [Investigation of the biomechanical properties of the cornea by bidirectional applanation: new approaches to interpreting the results].
    Avetisov SE; Novikov IA; Bubnova IA; Antonov AA; Siplivyĭ VI
    Vestn Oftalmol; 2008; 124(5):22-4. PubMed ID: 19062553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Influence of corneal biomechanical properties on intraocular pressure differences between an air-puff tonometer and the Goldmann applanation tonometer.
    Tranchina L; Lombardo M; Oddone F; Serrao S; Schiano Lomoriello D; Ducoli P
    J Glaucoma; 2013; 22(5):416-21. PubMed ID: 22366703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. An update on postrefractive surgery intraocular pressure determination.
    Yao WJ; Crossan AS
    Curr Opin Ophthalmol; 2014 Jul; 25(4):258-63. PubMed ID: 24807062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.