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.
204 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29908144)
1. Improving the quality of electroretinogram recordings using active electrodes. Yip YWY; Man TC; Pang CP; Brelén ME Exp Eye Res; 2018 Nov; 176():46-52. PubMed ID: 29908144 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of different recording parameters to establish a standard for flash electroretinography in rodents. Bayer AU; Cook P; Brodie SE; Maag KP; Mittag T Vision Res; 2001 Aug; 41(17):2173-85. PubMed ID: 11448710 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Inter-ocular and inter-session reliability of the electroretinogram photopic negative response (PhNR) in non-human primates. Fortune B; Bui BV; Cull G; Wang L; Cioffi GA Exp Eye Res; 2004 Jan; 78(1):83-93. PubMed ID: 14667830 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A novel method to reduce noise in electroretinography using skin electrodes: a study of noise level, inter-session variability, and reproducibility. Yamashita T; Miki A; Tabuchi A; Funada H; Kondo M Int Ophthalmol; 2017 Apr; 37(2):317-324. PubMed ID: 27278187 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Characterizing the Retinal Function of Psammomys obesus: A Diurnal Rodent Model to Study Human Retinal Function. Dellaa A; Polosa A; Mbarek S; Hammoum I; Messaoud R; Amara S; Azaiz R; Charfeddine R; Dogui M; Khairallah M; Lachapelle P; Ben Chaouacha-Chekir R Curr Eye Res; 2017 Jan; 42(1):79-87. PubMed ID: 27216715 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Intensity response function of the photopic negative response (PhNR): effect of age and test-retest reliability. Joshi NR; Ly E; Viswanathan S Doc Ophthalmol; 2017 Aug; 135(1):1-16. PubMed ID: 28508299 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Quantitative relationship of the scotopic and photopic ERG to photoreceptor cell loss in light damaged rats. Sugawara T; Sieving PA; Bush RA Exp Eye Res; 2000 May; 70(5):693-705. PubMed ID: 10870528 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. New photic stimulating system with white light-emitting diodes to elicit electroretinograms from zebrafish larvae. Matsubara H; Matsui Y; Miyata R; Nishimura Y; Yamamoto T; Tanaka T; Kondo M Doc Ophthalmol; 2017 Oct; 135(2):147-154. PubMed ID: 28756596 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison between albino and pigmented rabbit ERGs. Ioshimoto GL; Camargo AA; Liber AMP; Nagy BV; Damico FM; Ventura DF Doc Ophthalmol; 2018 Apr; 136(2):113-123. PubMed ID: 29572760 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Multifocal ERG using ERG-jet and Gold Foil electrodes in normal subjects: comparison and reproducibility]. Thimonier C; Daubas P; Bourdon L; Deral-Stephant V; Menu JP; Vignal R; Roux C J Fr Ophtalmol; 2008 Jun; 31(6 Pt 1):585-90. PubMed ID: 18772809 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Retinal on-pathway deficit in congenital disorder of glycosylation due to phosphomannomutase deficiency. Thompson DA; Lyons RJ; Liasis A; Russell-Eggitt I; Jägle H; Grünewald S Arch Ophthalmol; 2012 Jun; 130(6):712-9. PubMed ID: 22801829 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Non-selectivity of ERG reductions in eyes treated for retinoblastoma. Liu CY; Jonna G; Francis JH; Marr BP; Abramson DH; Brodie SE Doc Ophthalmol; 2014 Feb; 128(1):13-23. PubMed ID: 24213436 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Photopic negative response using a handheld mini-ganzfeld stimulator in healthy adults: normative values, intra- and inter-session variability. Berezovsky A; Karanjia R; Fernandes AG; Botelho GIS; Bueno TLN; Ferraz NN; Sacai PY; Coupland SG; Sadun AA; Salomão SR Doc Ophthalmol; 2021 Apr; 142(2):153-163. PubMed ID: 32681419 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Relative Genetic and Environmental Contributions to Variations in Human Retinal Electrical Responses Quantified in a Twin Study. Bhatti T; Tariq A; Shen T; Williams KM; Hammond CJ; Mahroo OA Ophthalmology; 2017 Aug; 124(8):1175-1185. PubMed ID: 28434717 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effect of varying skin surface electrode position on electroretinogram responses recorded using a handheld stimulating and recording system. Hobby AE; Kozareva D; Yonova-Doing E; Hossain IT; Katta M; Huntjens B; Hammond CJ; Binns AM; Mahroo OA Doc Ophthalmol; 2018 Oct; 137(2):79-86. PubMed ID: 30046929 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Electrophysiological testing as a method of cone-rod and cone dystrophy diagnoses and prediction of disease progression. Langwińska-Wośko E; Szulborski K; Zaleska-Żmijewska A; Szaflik J Doc Ophthalmol; 2015 Apr; 130(2):103-9. PubMed ID: 25603773 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. In vivo electrical stimulation of rabbit retina with a microfabricated array: strategies to maximize responses for prospective assessment of stimulus efficacy and biocompatibility. Rizzo JF; Goldbaum S; Shahin M; Denison TJ; Wyatt J Restor Neurol Neurosci; 2004; 22(6):429-43. PubMed ID: 15798362 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Retinal A2A and A3 adenosine receptors modulate the components of the rat electroretinogram. Jonsson G; Eysteinsson T Vis Neurosci; 2017 Jan; 34():E001. PubMed ID: 28304243 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. [Comparison between subtraction skin electrodes and corneal-contact electrodes in flash electroretinograms]. Kaid T; Matsunag M; Hanaya J; Nakamura Y; Ohtani S; Miyat K; Kondo M Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi; 2013 Jan; 117(1):5-11. PubMed ID: 23424970 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]