334 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29331951)
1. SITA-Standard perimetry has better performance than FDT2 matrix perimetry for detecting glaucomatous progression.
Wall M; Johnson CA; Zamba KD
Br J Ophthalmol; 2018 Oct; 102(10):1396-1401. PubMed ID: 29331951
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Visual field progression with frequency-doubling matrix perimetry and standard automated perimetry in patients with glaucoma and in healthy controls.
Redmond T; O'Leary N; Hutchison DM; Nicolela MT; Artes PH; Chauhan BC
JAMA Ophthalmol; 2013 Dec; 131(12):1565-72. PubMed ID: 24177807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Automated perimetry: a report by the American Academy of Ophthalmology.
Delgado MF; Nguyen NT; Cox TA; Singh K; Lee DA; Dueker DK; Fechtner RD; Juzych MS; Lin SC; Netland PA; Pastor SA; Schuman JS; Samples JR;
Ophthalmology; 2002 Dec; 109(12):2362-74. PubMed ID: 12466186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Glaucoma progression detection with frequency doubling technology (FDT) compared to standard automated perimetry (SAP) in the Groningen Longitudinal Glaucoma Study.
Wesselink C; Jansonius NM
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2017 Sep; 37(5):594-601. PubMed ID: 28836391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Frequency doubling technology perimetry for detection of visual field progression in glaucoma: a pointwise linear regression analysis.
Liu S; Yu M; Weinreb RN; Lai G; Lam DS; Leung CK
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2014 May; 55(5):2862-9. PubMed ID: 24595388
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Humphrey matrix frequency doubling perimetry for detection of visual-field defects in open-angle glaucoma.
Clement CI; Goldberg I; Healey PR; Graham S
Br J Ophthalmol; 2009 May; 93(5):582-8. PubMed ID: 18669543
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Glaucomatous visual field progression with frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in a longitudinal prospective study.
Haymes SA; Hutchison DM; McCormick TA; Varma DK; Nicolela MT; LeBlanc RP; Chauhan BC
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Feb; 46(2):547-54. PubMed ID: 15671281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Six-month Longitudinal Comparison of a Portable Tablet Perimeter With the Humphrey Field Analyzer.
Prea SM; Kong YXG; Mehta A; He M; Crowston JG; Gupta V; Martin KR; Vingrys AJ
Am J Ophthalmol; 2018 Jun; 190():9-16. PubMed ID: 29550190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Relationship of SITA and full-threshold standard perimetry to frequency-doubling technology perimetry in glaucoma.
Boden C; Pascual J; Medeiros FA; Aihara M; Weinreb RN; Sample PA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Jul; 46(7):2433-9. PubMed ID: 15980232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of size modulation and conventional standard automated perimetry with the 24-2 test protocol in glaucoma patients.
Hirasawa K; Shoji N; Kasahara M; Matsumura K; Shimizu K
Sci Rep; 2016 May; 6():25563. PubMed ID: 27149561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Evaluation of hemifield sector analysis protocol in multifocal visual evoked potential objective perimetry for the diagnosis and early detection of glaucomatous field defects.
Mousa MF; Cubbidge RP; Al-Mansouri F; Bener A
Korean J Ophthalmol; 2014 Feb; 28(1):49-65. PubMed ID: 24511212
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Sensitivity and specificity of the Swedish interactive threshold algorithm for glaucomatous visual field defects.
Budenz DL; Rhee P; Feuer WJ; McSoley J; Johnson CA; Anderson DR
Ophthalmology; 2002 Jun; 109(6):1052-8. PubMed ID: 12045043
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of the frequency doubling technology screening algorithm and the Humphrey 24-2 SITA-FAST in a large eye screening.
Allen CS; Sponsel WE; Trigo Y; Dirks MS; Flynn WJ
Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2002 Feb; 30(1):8-14. PubMed ID: 11885802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Measuring Visual Fields in Children With Glaucoma Using a Portable Tablet.
Gupta V; Kong GXY; Singh A; Panigrahi A; Gupta S; Prea S; Vingrys AJ
Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2024 May; 13(5):10. PubMed ID: 38743410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
