289 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31348002)
1. Human foveal cone photoreceptor topography and its dependence on eye length.
Wang Y; Bensaid N; Tiruveedhula P; Ma J; Ravikumar S; Roorda A
Elife; 2019 Jul; 8():. PubMed ID: 31348002
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Intersubject variability of foveal cone photoreceptor density in relation to eye length.
Li KY; Tiruveedhula P; Roorda A
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2010 Dec; 51(12):6858-67. PubMed ID: 20688730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Assessing Interocular Symmetry of the Foveal Cone Mosaic.
Cava JA; Allphin MT; Mastey RR; Gaffney M; Linderman RE; Cooper RF; Carroll J
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2020 Dec; 61(14):23. PubMed ID: 33331861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. In vivo assessment of foveal geometry and cone photoreceptor density and spacing in children.
Mirhajianmoghadam H; Jnawali A; Musial G; Queener HM; Patel NB; Ostrin LA; Porter J
Sci Rep; 2020 Jun; 10(1):8942. PubMed ID: 32487997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Variability in Human Cone Topography Assessed by Adaptive Optics Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy.
Zhang T; Godara P; Blanco ER; Griffin RL; Wang X; Curcio CA; Zhang Y
Am J Ophthalmol; 2015 Aug; 160(2):290-300.e1. PubMed ID: 25935100
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Interocular Symmetry of Foveal Cone Topography in Congenital Achromatopsia.
Litts KM; Georgiou M; Langlo CS; Patterson EJ; Mastey RR; Kalitzeos A; Linderman RE; Lam BL; Fishman GA; Pennesi ME; Kay CN; Hauswirth WW; Michaelides M; Carroll J
Curr Eye Res; 2020 Oct; 45(10):1257-1264. PubMed ID: 32108519
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Distribution differences of macular cones measured by AOSLO: Variation in slope from fovea to periphery more pronounced than differences in total cones.
Elsner AE; Chui TY; Feng L; Song HX; Papay JA; Burns SA
Vision Res; 2017 Mar; 132():62-68. PubMed ID: 27793592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Relationship between foveal cone structure and clinical measures of visual function in patients with inherited retinal degenerations.
Ratnam K; Carroll J; Porco TC; Duncan JL; Roorda A
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2013 Aug; 54(8):5836-47. PubMed ID: 23908179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Variation in rod and cone density from the fovea to the mid-periphery in healthy human retinas using adaptive optics scanning laser ophthalmoscopy.
Wells-Gray EM; Choi SS; Bries A; Doble N
Eye (Lond); 2016 Aug; 30(8):1135-43. PubMed ID: 27229708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Relationship Between Foveal Cone Structure and Visual Acuity Measured With Adaptive Optics Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy in Retinal Degeneration.
Foote KG; Loumou P; Griffin S; Qin J; Ratnam K; Porco TC; Roorda A; Duncan JL
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2018 Jul; 59(8):3385-3393. PubMed ID: 30025078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Foveal cone spacing and cone photopigment density difference: objective measurements in the same subjects.
Marcos S; Tornow RP; Elsner AE; Navarro R
Vision Res; 1997 Jul; 37(14):1909-15. PubMed ID: 9274776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Distribution of mid-peripheral cones in emmetropic and myopic subjects using adaptive optics flood illumination camera.
Woog K; Legras R
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2019 Mar; 39(2):94-103. PubMed ID: 30697790
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Modeling the foveal cone mosaic imaged with adaptive optics scanning laser ophthalmoscopy.
Putnam NM; Hammer DX; Zhang Y; Merino D; Roorda A
Opt Express; 2010 Nov; 18(24):24902-16. PubMed ID: 21164835
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Axial length and cone density as assessed with adaptive optics in myopia.
Dabir S; Mangalesh S; Schouten JS; Berendschot TT; Kurian MK; Kumar AK; Yadav NK; Shetty R
Indian J Ophthalmol; 2015 May; 63(5):423-6. PubMed ID: 26139804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessing the spatial relationship between fixation and foveal specializations.
Wilk MA; Dubis AM; Cooper RF; Summerfelt P; Dubra A; Carroll J
Vision Res; 2017 Mar; 132():53-61. PubMed ID: 27286921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Intervisit Reproducibility of Foveal Cone Density Metrics.
Adhan I; Warr E; Grieshop J; Kreis J; Nikezic D; Walesa A; Hemsworth K; Cooper RF; Carroll J
Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2024 Jun; 13(6):18. PubMed ID: 38913007
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A study of factors affecting the human cone photoreceptor density measured by adaptive optics scanning laser ophthalmoscope.
Park SP; Chung JK; Greenstein V; Tsang SH; Chang S
Exp Eye Res; 2013 Mar; 108():1-9. PubMed ID: 23276813
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Cone Integrity in Glaucoma: An Adaptive-Optics Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy Study.
Hasegawa T; Ooto S; Takayama K; Makiyama Y; Akagi T; Ikeda HO; Nakanishi H; Suda K; Yamada H; Uji A; Yoshimura N
Am J Ophthalmol; 2016 Nov; 171():53-66. PubMed ID: 27565227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Human Foveal Cone and RPE Cell Topographies and Their Correspondence With Foveal Shape.
Baraas RC; Pedersen HR; Knoblauch K; Gilson SJ
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2022 Feb; 63(2):8. PubMed ID: 35113142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluating outer segment length as a surrogate measure of peak foveal cone density.
Wilk MA; Wilk BM; Langlo CS; Cooper RF; Carroll J
Vision Res; 2017 Jan; 130():57-66. PubMed ID: 27887888
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
