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 *

92 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3060338)

  • 1. Stimulus configuration and the format of the normal sensitivity gradient.
    Flanagan JG; Wild JM; Wood JM
    Doc Ophthalmol; 1988 Aug; 69(4):371-83. PubMed ID: 3060338
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Assessment of physiologic statokinetic dissociation by automated perimetry.
    Hudson C; Wild JM
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1992 Oct; 33(11):3162-8. PubMed ID: 1399422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Induced intraocular light scatter and the sensitivity gradient of the normal visual field.
    Wood JM; Wild JM; Crews SJ
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 1987; 225(5):369-73. PubMed ID: 3311894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Factors affecting the normal perimetric profile derived by automated static threshold LED perimetry. II. Accommodative microfluctuations.
    Wood JM; Bullimore MA; Wild JM; Gilmartin B
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 1988; 8(1):32-6. PubMed ID: 3419826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparing threshold visual fields between the Dicon TKS 4000 automated perimeter and the Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Wong AY; Dodge RM; Remington LA
    J Am Optom Assoc; 1995 Nov; 66(11):706-11. PubMed ID: 8576536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The efficacy of the dicon screening field to detect eyes with glaucomatous field loss by Humphrey threshold testing.
    Huang AS; Smith SD; Quigley HA
    J Glaucoma; 1998 Jun; 7(3):158-64. PubMed ID: 9627854
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The black hole effect in perimetry.
    Britt JM; Mills RP
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1988 May; 29(5):795-801. PubMed ID: 3366568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Factors affecting the normal perimetric profile derived by automated static threshold LED perimetry. I. Pupil size.
    Wood JM; Wild JM; Bullimore MA; Gilmartin B
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 1988; 8(1):26-31. PubMed ID: 2971152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Calibration of the Dicon Auto Perimeter 2000 compared with that of the Goldmann perimeter.
    Hart WM; Gordon MO
    Am J Ophthalmol; 1983 Dec; 96(6):744-50. PubMed ID: 6660263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Spatial summation and the cortical magnification of perimetric profiles.
    Wild JM; Wood JM; Flanagan JG
    Ophthalmologica; 1987; 195(2):88-96. PubMed ID: 3313151
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Threshold equivalence between perimeters.
    Anderson DR; Feuer WJ; Alward WL; Skuta GL
    Am J Ophthalmol; 1989 May; 107(5):493-505. PubMed ID: 2712132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Visual-field defects in well-defined retinal lesions using Humphrey and Dicon perimeters.
    Bass SJ; Feldman J
    Optometry; 2000 Oct; 71(10):643-52. PubMed ID: 11063269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. [Study of early glaucomatous visual field defects with the automatic perimeter Topcon SBP-1000. Comparative study with the Octopus 201 perimeter].
    Lachenmayr B
    Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 1987 Jul; 191(1):33-44. PubMed ID: 3657015
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The normal age-corrected and reaction time-corrected isopter derived by semi-automated kinetic perimetry.
    Vonthein R; Rauscher S; Paetzold J; Nowomiejska K; Krapp E; Hermann A; Sadowski B; Chaumette C; Wild JM; Schiefer U
    Ophthalmology; 2007 Jun; 114(6):1065-72. PubMed ID: 17331580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A comparison of automated static dark stimuli with the Humphrey STATPAC program in glaucomatous visual field loss.
    Mutlukan E
    Br J Ophthalmol; 1994 Mar; 78(3):175-84. PubMed ID: 8148332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Perimetric profiles and cortical representation.
    Wood JM; Wild JM; Drasdo N; Crews SJ
    Ophthalmic Res; 1986; 18(5):301-8. PubMed ID: 3808596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Mechanisms mediating visual detection in static perimetry.
    Harwerth RS; Smith EL; DeSantis L
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1993 Sep; 34(10):3011-23. PubMed ID: 8360032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Comparison of diagnostic performance and fixation control of two automated perimeters.
    Asman P; Fingeret M
    J Am Optom Assoc; 1997 Dec; 68(12):763-8. PubMed ID: 9635382
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Manipulation of sensitivity in visual field investigation.
    Barnes DA; Wild JM; Flanagan JG; Good PA; Crews SJ
    Doc Ophthalmol; 1985 Jun; 59(4):301-8. PubMed ID: 4028920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.