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 *

180 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33510957)

  • 1. Effects of Criterion Bias on Perimetric Sensitivity and Response Variability in Glaucoma.
    Rubinstein NJ; Turpin A; Denniss J; McKendrick AM
    Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2021 Jan; 10(1):18. PubMed ID: 33510957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Assessment of the reliability of standard automated perimetry in regions of glaucomatous damage.
    Gardiner SK; Swanson WH; Goren D; Mansberger SL; Demirel S
    Ophthalmology; 2014 Jul; 121(7):1359-69. PubMed ID: 24629617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Variability in patients with glaucomatous visual field damage is reduced using size V stimuli.
    Wall M; Kutzko KE; Chauhan BC
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1997 Feb; 38(2):426-35. PubMed ID: 9040476
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Differences in the Relation Between Perimetric Sensitivity and Variability Between Locations Across the Visual Field.
    Gardiner SK
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2018 Jul; 59(8):3667-3674. PubMed ID: 30029253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma.
    Artes PH; Hutchison DM; Nicolela MT; LeBlanc RP; Chauhan BC
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Jul; 46(7):2451-7. PubMed ID: 15980235
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Perimetric sensitivity and response variability in glaucoma with single-stimulus automated perimetry and multiple-stimulus perimetry with verbal feedback.
    Miranda MA; Henson DB
    Acta Ophthalmol; 2008 Mar; 86(2):202-6. PubMed ID: 18005269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of Quality and Output of Different Optimal Perimetric Testing Approaches in Children With Glaucoma.
    Patel DE; Cumberland PM; Walters BC; Russell-Eggitt I; Brookes J; Papadopoulos M; Khaw PT; Viswanathan AC; Garway-Heath D; Cortina-Borja M; Rahi JS;
    JAMA Ophthalmol; 2018 Feb; 136(2):155-161. PubMed ID: 29285534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Central perimetric sensitivity estimates are directly influenced by the fixation target.
    Denniss J; Astle AT
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2016 Jul; 36(4):453-8. PubMed ID: 27146101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of long-term variability for standard and short-wavelength automated perimetry in stable glaucoma patients.
    Blumenthal EZ; Sample PA; Zangwill L; Lee AC; Kono Y; Weinreb RN
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2000 Mar; 129(3):309-13. PubMed ID: 10704545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. [Thresholds and variability of retinal light sensitivity in each point of the examined visual field].
    Vitkov AA; Antonov AA; Asinovskova II; Kozlova IV; Semenov ED
    Vestn Oftalmol; 2024; 140(2. Vyp. 2):116-122. PubMed ID: 38739140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Long- and Short-Term Variability of Perimetry in Glaucoma.
    Gardiner SK; Swanson WH; Mansberger SL
    Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2022 Aug; 11(8):3. PubMed ID: 35917137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Properties of perimetric threshold estimates from Full Threshold, SITA Standard, and SITA Fast strategies.
    Artes PH; Iwase A; Ohno Y; Kitazawa Y; Chauhan BC
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2002 Aug; 43(8):2654-9. PubMed ID: 12147599
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Threshold Automated Perimetry of the Full Visual Field in Patients With Glaucoma With Mild Visual Loss.
    Wall M; Lee EJ; Wanzek RJ; Zamba KD; Turpin A; Chong LX; Marin-Franch I
    J Glaucoma; 2019 Nov; 28(11):997-1005. PubMed ID: 31567907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparison of Matrix with Humphrey Field Analyzer II with SITA.
    Fredette MJ; Giguère A; Anderson DR; Budenz DL; McSoley J
    Optom Vis Sci; 2015 May; 92(5):527-36. PubMed ID: 25875683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Do Intense Perimetric Stimuli Saturate the Healthy Visual System?
    Anderson AJ; McKendrick AM; Turpin A
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2016 Nov; 57(14):6397-6404. PubMed ID: 27893100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A new pattern electroretinogram paradigm evaluated in terms of user friendliness and agreement with perimetry.
    Yang A; Swanson WH
    Ophthalmology; 2007 Apr; 114(4):671-9. PubMed ID: 17398319
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Moving Stimulus Perimetry: A New Functional Test for Glaucoma.
    Gardiner SK; Mansberger SL
    Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2022 Oct; 11(10):9. PubMed ID: 36201198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.