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.
106 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3755124)
1. Advantages and limitations of the spatially adaptive program SAPRO in clinical perimetry. Fankhauser F; Funkhouser A; Kwasniewska S Int Ophthalmol; 1986 May; 9(2-3):179-89. PubMed ID: 3755124 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Adaptive programs for analysis of the visual field by automatic perimetry--basic problems and solutions. Efforts oriented towards the realisation of the generalised spatially adaptive Octopus program SAPRO. Haeberlin H; Fankhauser F Doc Ophthalmol; 1980 Dec; 50(1):123-41. PubMed ID: 7472130 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluating the applications of the spatially adaptive program (SAPRO) in clinical perimetry: Part I. Fankhauser F; Funkhouser A; Kwasniewska S Ophthalmic Surg; 1986 Jun; 17(6):338-42 contd. PubMed ID: 3755519 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Octopus programs SAPRO and F. Two new principles for the analysis of the visual field. Fankhauser F; Häberlin H; Jenni A Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol; 1981; 216(2):155-65. PubMed ID: 6910354 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparison between Tendency-Oriented Perimetry (TOP) and octopus threshold perimetry. Morales J; Weitzman ML; González de la Rosa M Ophthalmology; 2000 Jan; 107(1):134-42. PubMed ID: 10647732 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Influence of Test Strategy on Octopus Perimeter Cluster Mean Defect Values: Adaptive Bracketing Normal Strategy Versus Tendency-oriented Perimetry. Holló G J Glaucoma; 2016 Oct; 25(10):830-834. PubMed ID: 27300642 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [What new knowledge has automated perimetry with the Octopus brought on glaucomatous visual field changes?]. Gloor B; Stürmer J; Vökt B Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 1984 Apr; 184(4):249-53. PubMed ID: 6727246 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Visual field screening with a laptop computer system. Bruun-Jensen J Optometry; 2011 Sep; 82(9):519-27. PubMed ID: 21871394 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Customized, automated stimulus location choice for assessment of visual field defects. Chong LX; McKendrick AM; Ganeshrao SB; Turpin A Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2014 Apr; 55(5):3265-74. PubMed ID: 24781947 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluating the applications of the spatially adaptive program (SAPRO) in clinical perimetry: Part II. Fankhauser F; Funkhouser A; Kwasniewska S Ophthalmic Surg; 1986 Jul; 17(7):415-28. PubMed ID: 3088509 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. [The automatic perimeter octopus in clinic and research. Possibilities for using the new Octopus programs: F-series, SARGON, DELTA and SAPRO]. Fankhauser F Buch Augenarzt; 1982; 90():1-12. PubMed ID: 7093771 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Evaluation of kinetic programs in various automated perimeters. Hashimoto S; Matsumoto C; Eura M; Okuyama S; Shimomura Y Jpn J Ophthalmol; 2017 Jul; 61(4):299-306. PubMed ID: 28444485 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Fluctuations on the Humphrey and Octopus perimeters. Brenton RS; Argus WA Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1987 May; 28(5):767-71. PubMed ID: 3570687 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Screening for visual field abnormalities with automated perimetry. Keltner JL; Johnson CA Surv Ophthalmol; 1983; 28(3):175-83. PubMed ID: 6422573 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]