140 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37369097)
1. Comparison of a Novel Binocular Refraction System with Standard Digital Phoropter Refraction.
Bossie T; Reilly J; Vera-Diaz FA
Optom Vis Sci; 2023 Jul; 100(7):451-458. PubMed ID: 37369097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Steps towards Smarter Solutions in Optometry and Ophthalmology-Inter-Device Agreement of Subjective Methods to Assess the Refractive Errors of the Eye.
Ohlendorf A; Leube A; Wahl S
Healthcare (Basel); 2016 Jul; 4(3):. PubMed ID: 27417629
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of refractive error measures by the IRX3 aberrometer and autorefraction.
McCullough SJ; Little JA; Breslin KM; Saunders KJ
Optom Vis Sci; 2014 Oct; 91(10):1183-90. PubMed ID: 25192432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Ametropia detection using a novel, compact wavefront autorefractor.
Hernández CS; Gil A; Zaytouny A; Casares I; Poderoso J; de Lara A; Wehse A; Dave SR; Lim D; Lage E; Alejandre-Alba N
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2024 Mar; 44(2):311-320. PubMed ID: 38084770
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Clinical evaluation of an automated subjective refraction method implemented in a computer-controlled motorized phoropter.
Otero C; Aldaba M; Pujol J
J Optom; 2019; 12(2):74-83. PubMed ID: 30389250
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Validation of a simple-to-use, affordable, portable, wavefront aberrometry-based auto refractometer in the adult population: A prospective study.
Rao DP; Negiloni K; Gurunathan S; Velkumar S; Sivaraman A; Baig AU; Kumari B; Murali K
BMC Ophthalmol; 2022 Dec; 22(1):498. PubMed ID: 36536321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reliability and reproducibility of a handheld videorefractor.
Ogbuehi KC; Almaliki WH; AlQarni A; Osuagwu UL
Optom Vis Sci; 2015 May; 92(5):632-41. PubMed ID: 25822015
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Clinical evaluation of the Topcon BV-1000 automated subjective refraction system.
Dave T; Fukuma Y
Optom Vis Sci; 2004 May; 81(5):323-33. PubMed ID: 15181357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A Comparison between Automated Subjective Refraction and Traditional Subjective Refraction in Keratoconus Patients.
Carracedo G; Carpena-Torres C; Pastrana C; Privado-Aroco A; Serramito M; Espinosa-Vidal TM; Rodríguez-Lafora M
Optom Vis Sci; 2021 Jun; 98(6):597-604. PubMed ID: 34081650
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of objective and subjective binocular ocular refraction with looking in type.
Fukushima M; Hirota M; Yukimori T; Hayashi A; Hirohara Y; Saika M; Matsuoka K
BMC Ophthalmol; 2024 Apr; 24(1):170. PubMed ID: 38627750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Subjective refraction using power vectors by updating a conventional phoropter with a Stokes lens for continuous astigmatic power generation.
Moreno JRA; Micó V; Albarrán Diego C
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2023 Sep; 43(5):1029-1039. PubMed ID: 37264763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. Comparison of spherical equivalent refraction and astigmatism measured with three different models of autorefractors.
Gwiazda J; Weber C
Optom Vis Sci; 2004 Jan; 81(1):56-61. PubMed ID: 14747762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Does the Accuracy and Repeatability of Refractive Error Estimates Depend on the Measurement Principle of Autorefractors?
Padhy D; Bharadwaj SR; Nayak S; Rath S; Das T
Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2021 Jan; 10(1):2. PubMed ID: 33505769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The repeatability of automated and clinician refraction.
Bullimore MA; Fusaro RE; Adams CW
Optom Vis Sci; 1998 Aug; 75(8):617-22. PubMed ID: 9734807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. Retinoscopy/autorefraction: which is the best starting point for a noncycloplegic refraction?
Jorge J; Queirós A; Almeida JB; Parafita MA
Optom Vis Sci; 2005 Jan; 82(1):64-8. PubMed ID: 15630406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Clinical Comparison of High-resolution and Standard Refractions and Prescriptions.
Meyer D; Rickert M; Reed O; Joret P; Kollbaum P
Optom Vis Sci; 2023 Nov; 100(11):751-760. PubMed ID: 37861987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Agreement between refractive and corneal astigmatism in pseudophakic eyes.
Tejedor J; Guirao A
Cornea; 2013 Jun; 32(6):783-90. PubMed ID: 23132451
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
