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.
129 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36601199)
1. Personal Computer-Based Visual Field Testing as an Alternative to Standard Automated Perimetry. Khizer MA; Khan TA; Ijaz U; Khan S; Rehmatullah AK; Zahid I; Shah HG; Zahid MA; Sarfaraz H; Khurshid N Cureus; 2022 Dec; 14(12):e32094. PubMed ID: 36601199 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Specvis: Free and open-source software for visual field examination. Dzwiniel P; Gola M; Wójcik-Gryciuk A; Waleszczyk WJ PLoS One; 2017; 12(10):e0186224. PubMed ID: 29028825 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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. 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]
6. [The 8-year follow-up study for clinical diagnostic potentials of frequency-doubling technology perimetry for perimetrically normal eyes of open-angle glaucoma patients with unilateral visual field loss]. Fan X; Wu LL; Xiao GG; Ma ZZ; Liu F Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2018 Mar; 54(3):177-183. PubMed ID: 29518875 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. A Comparison of Perimetric Results from a Tablet Perimeter and Humphrey Field Analyzer in Glaucoma Patients. Kong YX; He M; Crowston JG; Vingrys AJ Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2016 Nov; 5(6):2. PubMed ID: 27847689 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Aiming for zero blindness]. Nakazawa T Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi; 2015 Mar; 119(3):168-93; discussion 194. PubMed ID: 25854109 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of a Novel Head-Mounted Objective Auto-perimetry (Gaze Analyzing Perimeter) and Humphrey Field Analyzer. Miyake M; Mori Y; Wada S; Yamada K; Shiraishi R; Numa S; Suda K; Kameda T; Ikeda H; Akagi T; Aibara T; Tamura H; Tsujikawa A Ophthalmol Glaucoma; 2024; 7(5):445-453. PubMed ID: 38823680 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Frequency-doubling technology perimetry for detection of the development of visual field defects in glaucoma suspect eyes: a prospective study. Liu S; Yu M; Weinreb RN; Lai G; Lam DS; Leung CK JAMA Ophthalmol; 2014 Jan; 132(1):77-83. PubMed ID: 24177945 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Usefulness of frequency-doubling technology for perimetrically normal eyes of open-angle glaucoma patients with unilateral field loss. Fan X; Wu LL; Ma ZZ; Xiao GG; Liu F Ophthalmology; 2010 Aug; 117(8):1530-7, 1537.e1-2. PubMed ID: 20466428 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. GlauCUTU: Virtual Reality Visual Field Test. Kunumpol P; Lerthirunvibul N; Phienphanich P; Munthuli A; Tantisevi V; Manassakorn A; Chansangpetch S; Itthipanichpong R; Ratanawongphaibol K; Rojanapongpun P; Tantibundhit C Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2021 Nov; 2021():7416-7421. PubMed ID: 34892811 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Short wavelength automated perimetry, frequency doubling technology perimetry, and pattern electroretinography for prediction of progressive glaucomatous standard visual field defects. Bayer AU; Erb C Ophthalmology; 2002 May; 109(5):1009-17. PubMed ID: 11986111 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Microperimetry, Humphrey field analyzer, and optical coherence tomography in detecting glaucoma: a comparative performance study. Akar S; Tekeli O; Kayaarasi Ozturker Z Int Ophthalmol; 2022 Jul; 42(7):2155-2165. PubMed ID: 35023012 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Virtual Reality Oculokinetic Perimetry Test Reproducibility and Relationship to Conventional Perimetry and OCT. Greenfield JA; Deiner M; Nguyen A; Wollstein G; Damato B; Backus BT; Wu M; Schuman JS; Ou Y Ophthalmol Sci; 2022 Mar; 2(1):100105. PubMed ID: 36276927 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]