163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31773810)
1. Comparing the Netra smartphone refractor to subjective refraction.
Tousignant B; Garceau MC; Bouffard-Saint-Pierre N; Bellemare MM; Hanssens JM
Clin Exp Optom; 2020 Jul; 103(4):501-506. PubMed ID: 31773810
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Accuracy of a Smartphone-based Autorefractor Compared with Criterion-standard Refraction.
Jeganathan VSE; Valikodath N; Niziol LM; Hansen S; Apostolou H; Woodward MA
Optom Vis Sci; 2018 Dec; 95(12):1135-1141. PubMed ID: 30451804
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. COMPARISON OF SMARTPHONE-BASED AND AUTOMATED REFRACTION WITH SUBJECTIVE REFRACTION FOR SCREENING OF REFRACTIVE ERRORS.
Ee CL; Samsudin A
Ophthalmic Epidemiol; 2022 Oct; 29(5):588-594. PubMed ID: 34620023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of the Near Eye Tool for Refractive Assessment (NETRA) and non-cycloplegic subjective refraction.
Hasrod N; Rubin A
BMJ Open Ophthalmol; 2022; 7(1):e000851. PubMed ID: 35452206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Agreement Between Autorefraction and Subjective Refraction in Keraring-Implanted Keratoconic Eyes.
Al-Tuwairqi WS; Ogbuehi KC; Razzouk H; Alanazi MA; Osuagwu UL
Eye Contact Lens; 2017 Mar; 43(2):116-122. PubMed ID: 26825280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. An alternative clinical routine for subjective refraction based on power vectors with trial frames.
María Revert A; Conversa MA; Albarrán Diego C; Micó V
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2017 Jan; 37(1):24-32. PubMed ID: 28030877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Self-assessment of refractive errors using a simple optical approach.
Leube A; Kraft C; Ohlendorf A; Wahl S
Clin Exp Optom; 2018 May; 101(3):386-391. PubMed ID: 29356102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Population-based assessment of sensitivity and specificity of a pinhole for detection of significant refractive errors in the community.
Marmamula S; Keeffe JE; Narsaiah S; Khanna RC; Rao GN
Clin Exp Optom; 2014 Nov; 97(6):523-7. PubMed ID: 24909916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Evaluating refraction and visual acuity with the Nidek autorefractometer AR-360A in a randomized population-based screening study.
Stoor K; Karvonen E; Liinamaa J; Saarela V
Acta Ophthalmol; 2018 Jun; 96(4):384-389. PubMed ID: 29193822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Experimental investigation of accommodation in eyes fit with multifocal contact lenses using a clinical auto-refractor.
Altoaimi BH; Kollbaum P; Meyer D; Bradley A
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2018 Mar; 38(2):152-163. PubMed ID: 29315718
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of the Visual Acuity and Refractive Error Using OPDIII and Subjective Findings in Visually Normal Subjects.
Alamdar M; Jafarzadehpur E; Mirzajani A; Yekta AA; Khabazkhoob M
Eye Contact Lens; 2018 Nov; 44 Suppl 2():S302-S306. PubMed ID: 30379733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Is an objective refraction optimised using the visual Strehl ratio better than a subjective refraction?
Hastings GD; Marsack JD; Nguyen LC; Cheng H; Applegate RA
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2017 May; 37(3):317-325. PubMed ID: 28370389
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparing low-cost handheld autorefractors: A practical approach to measuring refraction in low-resource settings.
Agarwal A; Bloom DE; deLuise VP; Lubet A; Murali K; Sastry SM
PLoS One; 2019; 14(10):e0219501. PubMed ID: 31614363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Incidence of refractive errors with corrective aids subsequent selection].
Benes P; Synek S; Petrová S; Sokolová SJ; Forýtková L; Holoubková Z
Cesk Slov Oftalmol; 2012 Feb; 68(1):11-4, 16. PubMed ID: 22679692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluating Self-Refraction and Ready-Made Spectacles for Treatment of Uncorrected Refractive Error.
Camp AS; Shane TS; Kang J; Thomas B; Pole C; Lee RK
Ophthalmic Epidemiol; 2018; 25(5-6):392-398. PubMed ID: 30118609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Multivariate analysis of repeatability for the Near Eye Tool for Refractive Assessment (NETRA).
Hasrod N; Rubin A
BMJ Open Ophthalmol; 2023 Nov; 8(1):. PubMed ID: 38007230
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Clinical Accuracy of the Nidek ARK-1 Autorefractor.
Paudel N; Adhikari S; Thakur A; Shrestha B; Loughman J
Optom Vis Sci; 2019 Jun; 96(6):407-413. PubMed ID: 31107837
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Accuracy of an automated refractor using a Hartmann-Shack sensor after corneal refractive surgery and cataract surgery.
Park JH; Kim MJ; Park JH; Song IS; Kim JY; Tchah H
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2015 Sep; 41(9):1889-97. PubMed ID: 26603398
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Reduced vision in highly myopic eyes without ocular pathology: the ZOC-BHVI high myopia study.
Jong M; Sankaridurg P; Li W; Resnikoff S; Naidoo K; He M
Clin Exp Optom; 2018 Jan; 101(1):77-83. PubMed ID: 28696042
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison of monochromatic aberrations in young adults with different visual acuity and refractive errors.
Yazar S; Hewitt AW; Forward H; McKnight CM; Tan A; Mountain JA; Mackey DA
J Cataract Refract Surg; 2014 Mar; 40(3):441-9. PubMed ID: 24417894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
