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 *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26099055)

  • 1. Assessment of Bulbar Redness with a Newly Developed Keratograph.
    Wu S; Hong J; Tian L; Cui X; Sun X; Xu J
    Optom Vis Sci; 2015 Aug; 92(8):892-9. PubMed ID: 26099055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Assessment of ocular redness measurements obtained with keratograph 5M and correlation with subjective grading scales.
    Pérez-Bartolomé F; Sanz-Pozo C; Martínez-de la Casa JM; Arriola-Villalobos P; Fernández-Pérez C; García-Feijoó J
    J Fr Ophtalmol; 2018 Nov; 41(9):836-846. PubMed ID: 30293826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Grading bulbar redness using cross-calibrated clinical grading scales.
    Schulze MM; Hutchings N; Simpson TL
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2011 Jul; 52(8):5812-7. PubMed ID: 21474775
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessing ocular bulbar redness: a comparison of methods.
    Downie LE; Keller PR; Vingrys AJ
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2016 Mar; 36(2):132-9. PubMed ID: 26890702
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Bulbar Redness and Dry Eye Disease: Comparison of a Validated Subjective Grading Scale and an Objective Automated Method.
    Schulze MM; Ng A; Yang M; Panjwani F; Srinivasan S; Jones LW; Senchyna M
    Optom Vis Sci; 2021 Feb; 98(2):113-120. PubMed ID: 33534379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The Ocular Redness Index: a novel automated method for measuring ocular injection.
    Amparo F; Wang H; Emami-Naeini P; Karimian P; Dana R
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2013 Jul; 54(7):4821-6. PubMed ID: 23766472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The repeatability of discrete and continuous anterior segment grading scales.
    Chong E; Simpson T; Fonn D
    Optom Vis Sci; 2000 May; 77(5):244-51. PubMed ID: 10831214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. How red is a white eye? Clinical grading of normal conjunctival hyperaemia.
    Murphy PJ; Lau JS; Sim MM; Woods RL
    Eye (Lond); 2007 May; 21(5):633-8. PubMed ID: 16518366
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluating a new objective grading software for conjunctival hyperaemia.
    Huntjens B; Basi M; Nagra M
    Cont Lens Anterior Eye; 2020 Apr; 43(2):137-143. PubMed ID: 31326277
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The development of validated bulbar redness grading scales.
    Schulze MM; Jones DA; Simpson TL
    Optom Vis Sci; 2007 Oct; 84(10):976-83. PubMed ID: 18049363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluation of Ocular Surface Disease in Patients With Glaucoma: Clinical Parameters, Self-report Assessment, and Keratograph Analysis.
    Portela RC; Fares NT; Machado LF; São Leão AF; de Freitas D; Paranhos A; Prata TS; Gracitelli CPB
    J Glaucoma; 2018 Sep; 27(9):794-801. PubMed ID: 29916999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Hyperemia Analysis Software for Assessment of Conjunctival Hyperemia Severity.
    Yoneda T; Sumi T; Hoshikawa Y; Kobayashi M; Fukushima A
    Curr Eye Res; 2019 Apr; 44(4):376-380. PubMed ID: 30512976
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Limbal and bulbar hyperaemia in normal eyes.
    Pult H; Murphy PJ; Purslow C; Nyman J; Woods RL
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2008 Jan; 28(1):13-20. PubMed ID: 18201331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The measurement of bulbar hyperemia: challenges and pitfalls.
    Baudouin C; Barton K; Cucherat M; Traverso C
    Eur J Ophthalmol; 2015; 25(4):273-9. PubMed ID: 26069220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The use of fractal analysis and photometry to estimate the accuracy of bulbar redness grading scales.
    Schulze MM; Hutchings N; Simpson TL
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2008 Apr; 49(4):1398-406. PubMed ID: 18385056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of an objective method of measuring bulbar redness to the use of traditional grading scales.
    Sorbara L; Simpson T; Duench S; Schulze M; Fonn D
    Cont Lens Anterior Eye; 2007 Mar; 30(1):53-9. PubMed ID: 17254834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Repeatability, reproducibility, and agreement of corneal power measurements obtained with a new corneal topographer.
    Mao X; Savini G; Zhuo Z; Feng Y; Zhang J; Wang Q; Chen H; Huang J
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2013 Oct; 39(10):1561-9. PubMed ID: 23860010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A comparison of subjective and objective conjunctival hyperaemia grading with AOS® Anterior software.
    Walker MK; Tomiyama ES; Skidmore KV; Assaad JR; Ticak A; Richdale K
    Clin Exp Optom; 2022 Jul; 105(5):494-499. PubMed ID: 34315357
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Sensitivity and reliability of objective image analysis compared to subjective grading of bulbar hyperaemia.
    Peterson RC; Wolffsohn JS
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2007 Nov; 91(11):1464-6. PubMed ID: 17475716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The perceived bulbar redness of clinical grading scales.
    Schulze MM; Hutchings N; Simpson TL
    Optom Vis Sci; 2009 Nov; 86(11):E1250-8. PubMed ID: 19770812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.