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 *

248 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32832229)

  • 1. A Comparison Between Refraction From an Adaptive Optics Visual Simulator and Clinical Refractions.
    Tabernero J; Otero C; Pardhan S
    Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2020 Jun; 9(7):23. PubMed ID: 32832229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Comparisons of objective and subjective refraction with and without cycloplegia using binocular wavefront optometer with autorefraction and retinoscopy in school-age children.
    Lei Y; Chen X; Cheng M; Li B; Jiang Y; Xu Y; Wang X
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2023 May; 261(5):1465-1472. PubMed ID: 36527496
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The precision of wavefront refraction compared to subjective refraction and autorefraction.
    Pesudovs K; Parker KE; Cheng H; Applegate RA
    Optom Vis Sci; 2007 May; 84(5):387-92. PubMed ID: 17502821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessment of subjective refraction with a clinical adaptive optics visual simulator.
    Hervella L; Villegas EA; Prieto PM; Artal P
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2019 Jan; 45(1):87-93. PubMed ID: 30309774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cycloplegic autorefraction versus subjective refraction: the Tehran Eye Study.
    Hashemi H; Khabazkhoob M; Asharlous A; Soroush S; Yekta A; Dadbin N; Fotouhi A
    Br J Ophthalmol; 2016 Aug; 100(8):1122-7. PubMed ID: 26541436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A comparison of a traditional and wavefront autorefraction.
    Lebow KA; Campbell CE
    Optom Vis Sci; 2014 Oct; 91(10):1191-8. PubMed ID: 25198541
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Objective and subjective preoperative refraction techniques for wavefront-optimized and wavefront-guided laser in situ keratomileusis.
    Perez-Straziota CE; Randleman JB; Stulting RD
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2009 Feb; 35(2):256-9. PubMed ID: 19185239
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A randomized clinical trial using cyclopentolate and tropicamide to compare cycloplegic refraction in Chinese young adults with dark irises.
    Pei R; Liu Z; Rong H; Zhao L; Du B; Jin N; Zhang H; Wang B; Pang Y; Wei R
    BMC Ophthalmol; 2021 Jun; 21(1):256. PubMed ID: 34112149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Agreement of wavefront-based refraction, dry and cycloplegic autorefraction with subjective refraction.
    Bamdad S; Momeni-Moghaddam H; Abdolahian M; Piñero DP
    J Optom; 2022; 15(1):100-106. PubMed ID: 32896507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Autorefraction as an outcome measure of laser in situ keratomileusis.
    Pesudovs K
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2004 Sep; 30(9):1921-8. PubMed ID: 15342056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. Clinical Evaluation Of a 0.05 D-step Binocular Wavefront Optometer in Young Adults in China.
    Cheng M; Chen X; Lei Y; Li B; Jiang Y; Xu Y; Zhou X; Wang X
    Clin Exp Optom; 2024 May; 107(4):395-401. PubMed ID: 36794379
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Accuracy of autorefraction in an adult Indian population.
    Kumar RS; Moe CA; Kumar D; Rackenchath MV; A V SD; Nagaraj S; Wittberg DM; Stamper RL; Keenan JD
    PLoS One; 2021; 16(5):e0251583. PubMed ID: 34010350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Accuracy and precision of automated subjective refraction in young hyperopes under cycloplegia.
    Carracedo G; Carpena-Torres C; Pastrana C; Rodríguez-Lafora M; Serramito M; Privado-Aroco A; Espinosa-Vidal TM
    J Optom; 2023; 16(4):252-260. PubMed ID: 37019707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Comparison of refractive assessment by wavefront aberrometry, autorefraction, and subjective refraction.
    Bennett JR; Stalboerger GM; Hodge DO; Schornack MM
    J Optom; 2015; 8(2):109-15. PubMed ID: 25498534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Repeatability and validity of Zywave aberrometer measurements.
    Hament WJ; Nabar VA; Nuijts RM
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2002 Dec; 28(12):2135-41. PubMed ID: 12498848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. [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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.