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 *

197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32722931)

  • 1. Comparison between Fundus Automated Perimetry and Humphrey Field Analyzer: Performance and usability of the Fundus Automated Perimetry and Humphrey Field Analyzer in healthy, ocular hypertensive, and glaucomatous patients.
    Morbio R; Longo C; De Vitto AML; Comacchio F; Della Porta LB; Marchini G
    Eur J Ophthalmol; 2021 Jul; 31(4):1850-1856. PubMed ID: 32722931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparison of Compass and Humphrey perimeters in detecting glaucomatous defects.
    Fogagnolo P; Modarelli A; Oddone F; Digiuni M; Montesano G; Orzalesi N; Rossetti L
    Eur J Ophthalmol; 2016 Nov; 26(6):598-606. PubMed ID: 27375066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Multicenter Comparison of the Toronto Portable Perimeter with the Humphrey Field Analyzer: A Pilot Study.
    Ahmed Y; Pereira A; Bowden S; Shi RB; Li Y; Ahmed IIK; Arshinoff SA
    Ophthalmol Glaucoma; 2022; 5(2):146-159. PubMed ID: 34358734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessing Precision of Hodapp-Parrish-Anderson Criteria for Staging Early Glaucomatous Damage in an Ocular Hypertension Cohort: A Retrospective Study.
    Chakravarti T
    Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila); 2017; 6(1):21-27. PubMed ID: 28161915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparing a head-mounted virtual reality perimeter and the Humphrey Field Analyzer for visual field testing in healthy and glaucoma patients.
    Phu J; Wang H; Kalloniatis M
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2024 Jan; 44(1):83-95. PubMed ID: 37803502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparing the Performance of Compass Perimetry With Humphrey Field Analyzer in Eyes With Glaucoma.
    Rao HL; Raveendran S; James V; Dasari S; Palakurthy M; Reddy HB; Pradhan ZS; Rao DA; Puttaiah NK; Devi S
    J Glaucoma; 2017 Mar; 26(3):292-297. PubMed ID: 27977480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. [Prospective randomized comparative study of frequency doubling perimetry vs standard automated perimetry in patients with glaucoma].
    Kampmeier J; Eisert B; Buchwald HJ; Lang GK; Lang GE
    Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2001 Mar; 218(3):157-67. PubMed ID: 11322052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Correlation between high-pass resolution perimetry and standard threshold perimetry in subjects with glaucoma and ocular hypertension.
    Iester M; Capris P; Altieri M; Zingirian M; Traverso CE
    Int Ophthalmol; 1999; 23(2):99-103. PubMed ID: 11196128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A Comparison between the Compass Fundus Perimeter and the Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Montesano G; Bryan SR; Crabb DP; Fogagnolo P; Oddone F; McKendrick AM; Turpin A; Lanzetta P; Perdicchi A; Johnson CA; Garway-Heath DF; Brusini P; Rossetti LM
    Ophthalmology; 2019 Feb; 126(2):242-251. PubMed ID: 30114416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Increased Depth, Reduced Extent, and Sharpened Edges of Visual Field Defects Measured by Compass Fundus Perimeter Compared to Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Liu P; Nguyen BN; Turpin A; McKendrick AM
    Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2021 Oct; 10(12):33. PubMed ID: 34694332
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of Perimetric Outcomes from a Tablet Perimeter, Smart Visual Function Analyzer, and Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Kang J; De Arrigunaga S; Freeman SE; Zhao Y; Lin M; Liebman DL; Roldan AM; Kim JA; Chang DS; Friedman DS; Elze T
    Ophthalmol Glaucoma; 2023; 6(5):509-520. PubMed ID: 36918066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Assessment of false positives with the Humphrey Field Analyzer II perimeter with the SITA Algorithm.
    Newkirk MR; Gardiner SK; Demirel S; Johnson CA
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Oct; 47(10):4632-7. PubMed ID: 17003461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Perimetric Comparison Between the IMOvifa and Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Nishida T; Eslani M; Weinreb RN; Arias J; Vasile C; Mohammadzadeh V; Moghimi S
    J Glaucoma; 2023 Feb; 32(2):85-92. PubMed ID: 36223309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Evaluation of VEP perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients.
    Bengtsson B
    Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 2002 Dec; 80(6):620-6. PubMed ID: 12485283
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Detection of glaucomatous visual field defect by nonconventional perimetry.
    Iester M; Altieri M; Vittone P; Calabria G; Zingirian M; Traverso CE
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2003 Jan; 135(1):35-9. PubMed ID: 12504694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Frequency doubling technology perimetry with the Humphrey Matrix 30-2 test.
    Brusini P; Salvetat ML; Zeppieri M; Parisi L
    J Glaucoma; 2006 Apr; 15(2):77-83. PubMed ID: 16633218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Advanced Vision Analyzer-Virtual Reality Perimeter: Device Validation, Functional Correlation and Comparison with Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Narang P; Agarwal A; Srinivasan M; Agarwal A
    Ophthalmol Sci; 2021 Jun; 1(2):100035. PubMed ID: 36249304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Validation of a Head-mounted Virtual Reality Visual Field Screening Device.
    Mees L; Upadhyaya S; Kumar P; Kotawala S; Haran S; Rajasekar S; Friedman DS; Venkatesh R
    J Glaucoma; 2020 Feb; 29(2):86-91. PubMed ID: 31790067
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Blue-on-yellow perimetry can predict the development of glaucomatous visual field loss.
    Johnson CA; Adams AJ; Casson EJ; Brandt JD
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1993 May; 111(5):645-50. PubMed ID: 8489447
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. SITA-Standard perimetry has better performance than FDT2 matrix perimetry for detecting glaucomatous progression.
    Wall M; Johnson CA; Zamba KD
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2018 Oct; 102(10):1396-1401. PubMed ID: 29331951
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.