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.
92 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3060338)
21. Automated pupil perimetry. Pupil field mapping in patients and normal subjects. Kardon RH; Kirkali PA; Thompson HS Ophthalmology; 1991 Apr; 98(4):485-95; discussion 495-6. PubMed ID: 2052302 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Variability of quantitative automated perimetry in normal observers. Lewis RA; Johnson CA; Keltner JL; Labermeier PK Ophthalmology; 1986 Jul; 93(7):878-81. PubMed ID: 3763131 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The effect of stimulus size on the measured threshold values in automated perimetry. Choplin NT; Sherwood MB; Spaeth GL Ophthalmology; 1990 Mar; 97(3):371-4. PubMed ID: 2336276 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Does rate of stimulus presentation affect measured visual field extent in infants and toddlers? Mohan KM; Dobson V; Harvey EM; Delaney SM; Leber NR Optom Vis Sci; 1999 Apr; 76(4):234-40. PubMed ID: 10333186 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Threshold variability with an automated LED perimeter. Desjardins D; Anderson DR Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1988 Jun; 29(6):915-21. PubMed ID: 3372165 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Stimulus motion increases measured visual field extent in children 3.5 to 30 months of age. Delaney SM; Dobson V; Harvey EM; Mohan KM; Weidenbacher HJ; Leber NR Optom Vis Sci; 2000 Feb; 77(2):82-9. PubMed ID: 10701806 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The detection of small relative simulated field defects using multifocal VEPs. Chan HL; Chu HW; Ng YF; Tam WK; Young SM; Lam CH; Cheung AL Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2005 May; 25(3):224-32. PubMed ID: 15854069 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. The relationship of visual threshold and reaction time to visual field eccentricity with conventional automated perimetry. Wall M; Kutzko KE; Chauhan BC Vision Res; 2002 Mar; 42(6):781-7. PubMed ID: 11888543 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Characteristics of the normative database for the Humphrey matrix perimeter. Anderson AJ; Johnson CA; Fingeret M; Keltner JL; Spry PG; Wall M; Werner JS Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Apr; 46(4):1540-8. PubMed ID: 15790927 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Some concepts on the use of three-dimensional isometric plots for the representation of differential sensitivity. Wild JM; Wood JM; Worthington FM; Crews SJ Doc Ophthalmol; 1987 Apr; 65(4):423-32. PubMed ID: 3319465 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. [Comparison of local differential luminance sensitivity (dls) between Oculus Twinfield Perimeter and Humphrey Field Analyzer 630 (HFA I) in normal volunteers of varying ages]. Lorch L; Dietrich TJ; Schwabe R; Schiefer U Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2001 Dec; 218(12):782-94. PubMed ID: 11805870 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. The influence of stimulus size on perimetric detection of small scotomata. Bek T; Lund-Andersen H Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 1989; 227(6):531-4. PubMed ID: 2625209 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The Effect of Attentional Cueing and Spatial Uncertainty in Visual Field Testing. Phu J; Kalloniatis M; Khuu SK PLoS One; 2016; 11(3):e0150922. PubMed ID: 26937972 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. The dark perimetric stimulus. Mutlukan E; Damato BE Br J Ophthalmol; 1992 May; 76(5):264-7. PubMed ID: 1390506 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Human peripheral spatial resolution for achromatic and chromatic stimuli: limits imposed by optical and retinal factors. Anderson SJ; Mullen KT; Hess RF J Physiol; 1991 Oct; 442():47-64. PubMed ID: 1798037 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Evaluation of stimulus velocity in automated kinetic perimetry in young healthy participants. Hirasawa K; Shoji N; Okada A; Takano K; Tomioka S Vision Res; 2014 May; 98():83-8. PubMed ID: 24705075 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]