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 *

348 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29356822)

  • 41. Isolation of short-wavelength sensitive mechanisms in normal and glaucomatous visual field regions.
    Demirel S; Johnson CA
    J Glaucoma; 2000 Feb; 9(1):63-73. PubMed ID: 10708234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Signal/noise analysis to compare tests for measuring visual field loss and its progression.
    Artes PH; Chauhan BC
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2009 Oct; 50(10):4700-8. PubMed ID: 19458326
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Increased rate of visual field loss associated with larger initial visual field threshold values on follow-up of open-angle glaucoma.
    Schwartz B; Takamoto T; Martin J
    J Glaucoma; 2004 Apr; 13(2):120-9. PubMed ID: 15097257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. A New SITA Perimetric Threshold Testing Algorithm: Construction and a Multicenter Clinical Study.
    Heijl A; Patella VM; Chong LX; Iwase A; Leung CK; Tuulonen A; Lee GC; Callan T; Bengtsson B
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2019 Feb; 198():154-165. PubMed ID: 30336129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Detection of glaucoma progression by perimetry and optic disc photography at different stages of the disease: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial.
    Öhnell H; Heijl A; Anderson H; Bengtsson B
    Acta Ophthalmol; 2017 May; 95(3):281-287. PubMed ID: 27778463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Comparison of glaucomatous visual field defects using standard full threshold and Swedish interactive threshold algorithms.
    Budenz DL; Rhee P; Feuer WJ; McSoley J; Johnson CA; Anderson DR
    Arch Ophthalmol; 2002 Sep; 120(9):1136-41. PubMed ID: 12215086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. 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]  

  • 48. 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]  

  • 49. Frequency-doubling technology perimetry for detection of the development of visual field defects in glaucoma suspect eyes: a prospective study.
    Liu S; Yu M; Weinreb RN; Lai G; Lam DS; Leung CK
    JAMA Ophthalmol; 2014 Jan; 132(1):77-83. PubMed ID: 24177945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Pulsar perimetry in the diagnosis of early glaucoma.
    Zeppieri M; Brusini P; Parisi L; Johnson CA; Sampaolesi R; Salvetat ML
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2010 Jan; 149(1):102-12. PubMed ID: 19800607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Frequency-doubling perimetry: comparison with standard automated perimetry to detect glaucoma.
    Leeprechanon N; Giangiacomo A; Fontana H; Hoffman D; Caprioli J
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2007 Feb; 143(2):263-271. PubMed ID: 17178091
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. 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]  

  • 53. The SITA perimetric threshold algorithms in glaucoma.
    Wild JM; Pacey IE; O'Neill EC; Cunliffe IA
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1999 Aug; 40(9):1998-2009. PubMed ID: 10440254
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Frequency doubling technology perimetry in open-angle glaucoma eyes with hemifield visual field damage: comparison of high-tension and normal-tension groups.
    Murata H; Tomidokoro A; Matsuo H; Tomita G; Araie M
    J Glaucoma; 2007 Jan; 16(1):9-13. PubMed ID: 17224743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Relationship between severity of visual field loss at presentation and rate of visual field progression in glaucoma.
    Rao HL; Kumar AU; Babu JG; Senthil S; Garudadri CS
    Ophthalmology; 2011 Feb; 118(2):249-53. PubMed ID: 20728941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Comparison of Rates of Fast and Catastrophic Visual Field Loss in Three Glaucoma Subtypes.
    Anderson AJ; Chaurasia AK; Sharma A; Gupta A; Gupta S; Khanna A; Gupta V
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2019 Jan; 60(1):161-167. PubMed ID: 30640968
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Probing glaucoma visual damage by rarebit perimetry.
    Brusini P; Salvetat ML; Parisi L; Zeppieri M
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2005 Feb; 89(2):180-4. PubMed ID: 15665349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. 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]  

  • 59. Comparison of visual field defects using matrix perimetry and standard achromatic perimetry.
    Patel A; Wollstein G; Ishikawa H; Schuman JS
    Ophthalmology; 2007 Mar; 114(3):480-7. PubMed ID: 17123623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. A novel strategy for the estimation of the general height of the visual field in patients with glaucoma.
    Marín-Franch I; Swanson WH; Malinovsky VE
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2014 May; 252(5):801-9. PubMed ID: 24638255
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 18.