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 *

218 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27847689)

  • 21. Diagnostic accuracy of an iPad application for detection of visual field defects.
    Richardson QR; Kumar RS; Ramgopal B; Rackenchath MV; A V SD; Mannil SS; Nagaraj S; Moe CA; Wittberg DM; O'Brien KS; Oatts JT; Stamper RL; Keenan JD
    Eye (Lond); 2023 Jun; 37(8):1690-1695. PubMed ID: 36064770
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Validation of a Tablet as a Tangent Perimeter.
    Vingrys AJ; Healey JK; Liew S; Saharinen V; Tran M; Wu W; Kong GY
    Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2016 Jul; 5(4):3. PubMed ID: 27486553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. [Prospective randomized comparative study of frequency doubling perimetry vs standard automated perimetry in patients with glaucoma].
    Kampmeier J; Eisert B; Buchwald HJ; Lang GK; Lang GE
    Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2001 Mar; 218(3):157-67. PubMed ID: 11322052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Retinal Sensitivity Thresholds Obtained Through Easyfield and Humphrey Perimeters in Eyes with Glaucoma: A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study.
    Nazareth T; Rocha J; Scoralick ALB; Dias DT; Gracitelli CPB; Kanadani FN; Prata TS
    Clin Ophthalmol; 2020; 14():4201-4207. PubMed ID: 33299296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. A Comparison between the Compass Fundus Perimeter and the Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Montesano G; Bryan SR; Crabb DP; Fogagnolo P; Oddone F; McKendrick AM; Turpin A; Lanzetta P; Perdicchi A; Johnson CA; Garway-Heath DF; Brusini P; Rossetti LM
    Ophthalmology; 2019 Feb; 126(2):242-251. PubMed ID: 30114416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Evaluation of VEP perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients.
    Bengtsson B
    Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 2002 Dec; 80(6):620-6. PubMed ID: 12485283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Validating tablet perimetry against standard Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer for glaucoma screening in Indian population.
    Ichhpujani P; Thakur S; Sahi RK; Kumar S
    Indian J Ophthalmol; 2021 Jan; 69(1):87-91. PubMed ID: 33323582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Correlation between high-pass resolution perimetry and standard threshold perimetry in subjects with glaucoma and ocular hypertension.
    Iester M; Capris P; Altieri M; Zingirian M; Traverso CE
    Int Ophthalmol; 1999; 23(2):99-103. PubMed ID: 11196128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Comparison of Visual Field Test Measurements With a Novel Approach on a Wearable Headset to Standard Automated Perimetry.
    Johnson C; Sayed A; McSoley J; Durbin M; Kashem R; Nicklin A; Lopez V; Mijares G; Chen M; Shaheen A; Segarra S; Rady N; Duque CA; Opoku-Baah C; Abou Shousha M
    J Glaucoma; 2023 Aug; 32(8):647-657. PubMed ID: 37311012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Comparison of Matrix with Humphrey Field Analyzer II with SITA.
    Fredette MJ; Giguère A; Anderson DR; Budenz DL; McSoley J
    Optom Vis Sci; 2015 May; 92(5):527-36. PubMed ID: 25875683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Comparison of the Humphrey Field Analyser and Humphrey Matrix Perimeter for the evaluation of glaucoma patients.
    Chen YH; Wu JN; Chen JT; Lu DW
    Ophthalmologica; 2008; 222(6):400-7. PubMed ID: 18781091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Comparing the Performance of Compass Perimetry With Humphrey Field Analyzer in Eyes With Glaucoma.
    Rao HL; Raveendran S; James V; Dasari S; Palakurthy M; Reddy HB; Pradhan ZS; Rao DA; Puttaiah NK; Devi S
    J Glaucoma; 2017 Mar; 26(3):292-297. PubMed ID: 27977480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Comparison of Quality and Output of Different Optimal Perimetric Testing Approaches in Children With Glaucoma.
    Patel DE; Cumberland PM; Walters BC; Russell-Eggitt I; Brookes J; Papadopoulos M; Khaw PT; Viswanathan AC; Garway-Heath D; Cortina-Borja M; Rahi JS;
    JAMA Ophthalmol; 2018 Feb; 136(2):155-161. PubMed ID: 29285534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Validation of a Head-mounted Virtual Reality Visual Field Screening Device.
    Mees L; Upadhyaya S; Kumar P; Kotawala S; Haran S; Rajasekar S; Friedman DS; Venkatesh R
    J Glaucoma; 2020 Feb; 29(2):86-91. PubMed ID: 31790067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Performance of an iPad Application to Detect Moderate and Advanced Visual Field Loss in Nepal.
    Johnson CA; Thapa S; George Kong YX; Robin AL
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2017 Oct; 182():147-154. PubMed ID: 28844641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. Comparison of Humphrey MATRIX and Swedish interactive threshold algorithm standard strategy in detecting early glaucomatous visual field loss.
    Prema R; George R; Hemamalini A; Sathyamangalam Ve R; Baskaran M; Vijaya L
    Indian J Ophthalmol; 2009; 57(3):207-11. PubMed ID: 19384015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Evaluation of threshold estimation and learning effect of two perimetric strategies, SITA Fast and CLIP, in damaged visual fields.
    Capris P; Autuori S; Capris E; Papadia M
    Eur J Ophthalmol; 2008; 18(2):182-90. PubMed ID: 18320509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. A comparison of perimetric results with the Medmont and Humphrey perimeters.
    Landers J; Sharma A; Goldberg I; Graham S
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2003 Jun; 87(6):690-4. PubMed ID: 12770962
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Assessment of false positives with the Humphrey Field Analyzer II perimeter with the SITA Algorithm.
    Newkirk MR; Gardiner SK; Demirel S; Johnson CA
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Oct; 47(10):4632-7. PubMed ID: 17003461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.