209 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27055215)
1. Evaluation of a Machine-Learning Classifier for Keratoconus Detection Based on Scheimpflug Tomography.
Ruiz Hidalgo I; Rodriguez P; Rozema JJ; Ní Dhubhghaill S; Zakaria N; Tassignon MJ; Koppen C
Cornea; 2016 Jun; 35(6):827-32. PubMed ID: 27055215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Use of a support vector machine for keratoconus and subclinical keratoconus detection by topographic and tomographic data.
Arbelaez MC; Versaci F; Vestri G; Barboni P; Savini G
Ophthalmology; 2012 Nov; 119(11):2231-8. PubMed ID: 22892148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Accuracy of machine learning classifiers using bilateral data from a Scheimpflug camera for identifying eyes with preclinical signs of keratoconus.
Kovács I; Miháltz K; Kránitz K; Juhász É; Takács Á; Dienes L; Gergely R; Nagy ZZ
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2016 Feb; 42(2):275-83. PubMed ID: 27026453
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Validation of an Objective Keratoconus Detection System Implemented in a Scheimpflug Tomographer and Comparison With Other Methods.
Ruiz Hidalgo I; Rozema JJ; Saad A; Gatinel D; Rodriguez P; Zakaria N; Koppen C
Cornea; 2017 Jun; 36(6):689-695. PubMed ID: 28368992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison of Corneal Dynamic and Tomographic Analysis in Normal, Forme Fruste Keratoconic, and Keratoconic Eyes.
Wang YM; Chan TCY; Yu M; Jhanji V
J Refract Surg; 2017 Sep; 33(9):632-638. PubMed ID: 28880339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Detection of subclinical keratoconus using an automated decision tree classification.
Smadja D; Touboul D; Cohen A; Doveh E; Santhiago MR; Mello GR; Krueger RR; Colin J
Am J Ophthalmol; 2013 Aug; 156(2):237-246.e1. PubMed ID: 23746611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Pentacam Scheimpflug tomography findings in topographically normal patients and subclinical keratoconus cases.
Ruiseñor Vázquez PR; Galletti JD; Minguez N; Delrivo M; Fuentes Bonthoux F; Pförtner T; Galletti JG
Am J Ophthalmol; 2014 Jul; 158(1):32-40.e2. PubMed ID: 24709808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Evaluation of corneal elevation, pachymetry and keratometry in keratoconic eyes with respect to the stage of Amsler-Krumeich classification.
Kamiya K; Ishii R; Shimizu K; Igarashi A
Br J Ophthalmol; 2014 Apr; 98(4):459-63. PubMed ID: 24457362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Topographic typology in a consecutive series of refractive surgery candidates.
Mohammadi SF; Mohammadzadeh V; Kadivar S; Beheshtnejad AH; Norooznezhad AH; Hashemi SH
Int Ophthalmol; 2018 Aug; 38(4):1611-1619. PubMed ID: 28676992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Posterior corneal elevation and back difference corneal elevation in diagnosing forme fruste keratoconus in the fellow eyes of unilateral keratoconus patients.
Muftuoglu O; Ayar O; Ozulken K; Ozyol E; Akıncı A
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2013 Sep; 39(9):1348-57. PubMed ID: 23820305
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluating the Performance of Various Machine Learning Algorithms to Detect Subclinical Keratoconus.
Cao K; Verspoor K; Sahebjada S; Baird PN
Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2020 Apr; 9(2):24. PubMed ID: 32818085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Proposing an ensemble learning model based on neural network and fuzzy system for keratoconus diagnosis based on Pentacam measurements.
Ghaderi M; Sharifi A; Jafarzadeh Pour E
Int Ophthalmol; 2021 Dec; 41(12):3935-3948. PubMed ID: 34322847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Keratoconus Clinical Findings According to Different Classifications.
Naderan M; Shoar S; Kamaleddin MA; Rajabi MT; Naderan M; Khodadadi M
Cornea; 2015 Sep; 34(9):1005-11. PubMed ID: 26203749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Revisiting Pentacam Parameters in the Diagnosis of Subclinical and Mild Keratoconus Based on Different Grading System Definitions.
Toprak İ; Martin Ç; Güneş CE; Alio J
Turk J Ophthalmol; 2023 Dec; 53(6):324-335. PubMed ID: 38008938
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Use of machine learning to achieve keratoconus detection skills of a corneal expert.
Cohen E; Bank D; Sorkin N; Giryes R; Varssano D
Int Ophthalmol; 2022 Dec; 42(12):3837-3847. PubMed ID: 35953576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Corneal densitometry in keratoconus.
Lopes B; Ramos I; Ambrósio R
Cornea; 2014 Dec; 33(12):1282-6. PubMed ID: 25285589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A combination of topographic and pachymetric parameters in keratoconus diagnosis.
Toprak I; Yaylalı V; Yildirim C
Cont Lens Anterior Eye; 2015 Oct; 38(5):357-62. PubMed ID: 25936634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of central corneal thickness measurements with a rotating scheimpflug camera, a specular microscope, optical low-coherence reflectometry, and ultrasound pachymetry in keratoconic eyes.
Cinar Y; Cingu AK; Turkcu FM; Cinar T; Sahin A; Yuksel H; Ari S
Semin Ophthalmol; 2015 Mar; 30(2):105-11. PubMed ID: 24171806
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Corneal Topography Raw Data Classification Using a Convolutional Neural Network.
Zéboulon P; Debellemanière G; Bouvet M; Gatinel D
Am J Ophthalmol; 2020 Nov; 219():33-39. PubMed ID: 32533948
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Influence of the reference surface shape for discriminating between normal corneas, subclinical keratoconus, and keratoconus.
Smadja D; Santhiago MR; Mello GR; Krueger RR; Colin J; Touboul D
J Refract Surg; 2013 Apr; 29(4):274-81. PubMed ID: 23557226
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
