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 *

67 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2677457)

  • 1. A comparison of three methods for abbreviating G1 examinations.
    Funkhouser A; Fankhauser F; Hirsbrunner H
    Jpn J Ophthalmol; 1989; 33(3):288-94. PubMed ID: 2677457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A comparison of eight test location configurations for estimating G1 mean defect values.
    Funkhouser A; Fankhauser F; Hirsbrunner H
    Jpn J Ophthalmol; 1989; 33(3):295-9. PubMed ID: 2677458
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Variability in patients with glaucomatous visual field damage is reduced using size V stimuli.
    Wall M; Kutzko KE; Chauhan BC
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1997 Feb; 38(2):426-35. PubMed ID: 9040476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. [The value of frequency doubling perimetry in glaucoma screening of aged 40 or more population].
    Li JJ; Xu L; Zhang RX; Sun XY; Yang H; Zou Y; Zhao JL
    Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2005 Mar; 41(3):221-5. PubMed ID: 15840362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Indications for stimulus 3 and 5 in automatic perimetry. Preliminary results].
    Zulauf M; Caprioli J
    Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 1994 May; 204(5):407-8. PubMed ID: 8051884
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Perimetry with normal Octopus technique and Weber 'dynamic' technique. Initial results with reference to reproducibility of measurements in glaucoma patients].
    Zulauf M; Fehlmann P; Flammer J
    Ophthalmologe; 1996 Aug; 93(4):420-7. PubMed ID: 8963141
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Visual field progression in glaucoma: total versus pattern deviation analyses.
    Artes PH; Nicolela MT; LeBlanc RP; Chauhan BC
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Dec; 46(12):4600-6. PubMed ID: 16303955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Feasibility of saccadic vector optokinetic perimetry: a method of automated static perimetry for children using eye tracking.
    Murray IC; Fleck BW; Brash HM; Macrae ME; Tan LL; Minns RA
    Ophthalmology; 2009 Oct; 116(10):2017-26. PubMed ID: 19560207
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Visual function-specific perimetry for indirect comparison of different ganglion cell populations in glaucoma.
    Sample PA; Bosworth CF; Blumenthal EZ; Girkin C; Weinreb RN
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2000 Jun; 41(7):1783-90. PubMed ID: 10845599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A comparison of cupola-free perimetry with conventional perimetry: preliminary results.
    Jenni A; Hirsbrunner HP
    Jpn J Ophthalmol; 1990; 34(3):280-90. PubMed ID: 2079773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Frequency doubling technology perimetry abnormalities as predictors of glaucomatous visual field loss.
    Medeiros FA; Sample PA; Weinreb RN
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2004 May; 137(5):863-71. PubMed ID: 15126151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. [The Octopus G1 program. Description and use].
    Pradines F; Delbosc B; Montard M; Royer J
    J Fr Ophtalmol; 1987; 10(11):699-705. PubMed ID: 3329204
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [A comparative analysis of standard automated perimetry and short wavelength automated perimetry in early diagnosis of glaucoma].
    Chiseliţă D; Crenguţa MI; Danielescu C; Mihaela NM
    Oftalmologia; 2006; 50(2):94-102. PubMed ID: 16927766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The psychometric function and reaction times of automated perimetry in normal and abnormal areas of the visual field in patients with glaucoma.
    Wall M; Maw RJ; Stanek KE; Chauhan BC
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1996 Apr; 37(5):878-85. PubMed ID: 8603872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Fundus perimetry with the Micro Perimeter 1 in normal individuals: comparison with conventional threshold perimetry.
    Springer C; Bültmann S; Völcker HE; Rohrschneider K
    Ophthalmology; 2005 May; 112(5):848-54. PubMed ID: 15878065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [Short-wavelength perimetry in diagnosis of early glaucoma: comparison with standard automated perimetry].
    Qi S; Jiang Y
    Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2002 Jan; 38(1):31-5. PubMed ID: 11955298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Visual field screening with a laptop computer system.
    Bruun-Jensen J
    Optometry; 2011 Sep; 82(9):519-27. PubMed ID: 21871394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.