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.
98 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28692736)
21. Multisampling suprathreshold perimetry: a comparison with conventional suprathreshold and full-threshold strategies by computer simulation. Artes PH; Henson DB; Harper R; McLeod D Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2003 Jun; 44(6):2582-7. PubMed ID: 12766060 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Size threshold perimetry performs as well as conventional automated perimetry with stimulus sizes III, V, and VI for glaucomatous loss. Wall M; Doyle CK; Eden T; Zamba KD; Johnson CA Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2013 Jun; 54(6):3975-83. PubMed ID: 23633660 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Choosing two points to add to the 24-2 pattern to better describe macular visual field damage due to glaucoma. Chen S; McKendrick AM; Turpin A Br J Ophthalmol; 2015 Sep; 99(9):1236-9. PubMed ID: 25802251 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. A comparison of false-negative responses for full threshold and SITA standard perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal observers. Johnson CA; Sherman K; Doyle C; Wall M J Glaucoma; 2014; 23(5):288-92. PubMed ID: 23632399 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Learning effect and test-retest variability of pulsar perimetry. Salvetat ML; Zeppieri M; Parisi L; Johnson CA; Sampaolesi R; Brusini P J Glaucoma; 2013 Mar; 22(3):230-7. PubMed ID: 22027935 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Recent developments in perimetry: test stimuli and procedures. McKendrick AM Clin Exp Optom; 2005 Mar; 88(2):73-80. PubMed ID: 15807638 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. TORONTO: A trial-oriented multidimensional psychometric testing algorithm. Shi RB; Eizenman M; Li-Han LY; Wong W J Vis; 2024 Jul; 24(7):2. PubMed ID: 38953860 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Visual function-specific perimetry to identify glaucomatous visual loss using three different definitions of visual field abnormality. Tafreshi A; Sample PA; Liebmann JM; Girkin CA; Zangwill LM; Weinreb RN; Lalezary M; Racette L Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2009 Mar; 50(3):1234-40. PubMed ID: 18978349 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Comparison of standard automated perimetry, frequency-doubling technology perimetry, and short-wavelength automated perimetry for detection of glaucoma. Liu S; Lam S; Weinreb RN; Ye C; Cheung CY; Lai G; Lam DS; Leung CK Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2011 Sep; 52(10):7325-31. PubMed ID: 21810975 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. 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]
31. Screening with automated perimetry using a threshold-related three-level algorithm. Kosoko O; Sommer A; Auer C Ophthalmology; 1986 Jul; 93(7):882-6. PubMed ID: 3763132 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. A new index to monitor central visual field progression in glaucoma. de Moraes CG; Furlanetto RL; Ritch R; Liebmann JM Ophthalmology; 2014 Aug; 121(8):1531-8. PubMed ID: 24726202 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The effective dynamic ranges of standard automated perimetry sizes III and V and motion and matrix perimetry. Wall M; Woodward KR; Doyle CK; Zamba G Arch Ophthalmol; 2010 May; 128(5):570-6. PubMed ID: 20457977 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Validation of a new static perimetric thresholding strategy (GATE). Luithardt AF; Meisner C; Monhart M; Krapp E; Mast A; Schiefer U Br J Ophthalmol; 2015 Jan; 99(1):11-5. PubMed ID: 25053761 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Flicker defined form perimetry in glaucoma suspects with normal achromatic visual fields. Reznicek L; Lamparter J; Vogel M; Kampik A; Hirneiß C Curr Eye Res; 2015 Jul; 40(7):683-9. PubMed ID: 25207744 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Retesting visual fields: utilizing prior information to decrease test-retest variability in glaucoma. Turpin A; Jankovic D; McKendrick AM Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2007 Apr; 48(4):1627-34. PubMed ID: 17389493 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Total deviation probability plots for stimulus size v perimetry: a comparison with size III stimuli. Wall M; Brito CF; Woodward KR; Doyle CK; Kardon RH; Johnson CA Arch Ophthalmol; 2008 Apr; 126(4):473-9. PubMed ID: 18413515 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Quantifying discordance between structure and function measurements in the clinical assessment of glaucoma. Zhu H; Crabb DP; Fredette MJ; Anderson DR; Garway-Heath DF Arch Ophthalmol; 2011 Sep; 129(9):1167-74. PubMed ID: 21555599 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Development of efficient threshold strategies for frequency doubling technology perimetry using computer simulation. Turpin A; McKendrick AM; Johnson CA; Vingrys AJ Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2002 Feb; 43(2):322-31. PubMed ID: 11818373 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. 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] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]