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 *

158 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 6906155)

  • 21. Clinical experience with the Fieldmaster perimeter.
    Bobrow JC; Drews RC
    Am J Ophthalmol; 1982 Feb; 93(2):238-41. PubMed ID: 7065096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Detection and characterisation of visual field defects using Octopus perimetry in congenital glaucoma.
    Morales-Fernández L; Martínez-de-la-Casa JM; Sáenz-Francés F; Perez-García P; Borrego-Sanz L; García-Feijóo J
    Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol (Engl Ed); 2024 Mar; 99(3):91-97. PubMed ID: 38043736
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Is visual field evaluation using multiple correlations and linear regressions useful? An evaluation of Delphi perimetry.
    Wishart PK; Wardrop DR; Kosmin AS
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 1998 Jul; 236(7):493-500. PubMed ID: 9672794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The screening of the central visual field.
    Krieglstein GK; Andrae K
    Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol; 1975; 193(2):145-52. PubMed ID: 1078956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. A clinical comparison of visual field testing with a new automated perimeter, the Humphrey Field Analyzer, and the Goldmann perimeter.
    Beck RW; Bergstrom TJ; Lichter PR
    Ophthalmology; 1985 Jan; 92(1):77-82. PubMed ID: 3974997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. High spatial resolution automated perimetry in glaucoma.
    Westcott MC; McNaught AI; Crabb DP; Fitzke FW; Hitchings RA
    Br J Ophthalmol; 1997 Jun; 81(6):452-9. PubMed ID: 9274408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. A comparison of manual kinetic and automated static perimetry in obtaining ptosis fields.
    Riemann CD; Hanson S; Foster JA
    Arch Ophthalmol; 2000 Jan; 118(1):65-9. PubMed ID: 10636416
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. [Problems and their solutions in today's perimetry].
    Etienne R; Etienne A; Sellem E
    J Fr Ophtalmol; 1983; 6(2):179-86. PubMed ID: 6345645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Automatic computerized perimetry in the detection of neurological visual field defects. A pilot study.
    Bynke H; Heijl A
    Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol; 1978 Apr; 206(1):11-5. PubMed ID: 306205
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. [Modern perimetry: automatic or manual?].
    Etienne R; Etienne A; Sellem E
    J Fr Ophtalmol; 1983; 6(11):927-32. PubMed ID: 6672066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Can Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm fast perimetry be used as an alternative to goldmann perimetry in neuro-ophthalmic practice?
    Szatmáry G; Biousse V; Newman NJ
    Arch Ophthalmol; 2002 Sep; 120(9):1162-73. PubMed ID: 12215089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. [Quantification and progression of the visual field defect in glaucoma without hypertension, glaucoma simplex and pigmentary glaucoma. A clinical study with the Delta Program of the 201 Octopus perimeter].
    Gramer E; Althaus G
    Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 1987 Sep; 191(3):184-98. PubMed ID: 3682683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Comparison of high-pass resolution perimetry and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma.
    Martinez GA; Sample PA; Weinreb RN
    Am J Ophthalmol; 1995 Feb; 119(2):195-201. PubMed ID: 7832226
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Static threshold examination of the peripheral nasal visual field in glaucoma.
    Caprioli J; Spaeth GL
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1985 Aug; 103(8):1150-4. PubMed ID: 3839665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy between Octopus 900 and Goldmann kinetic visual fields.
    Rowe FJ; Rowlands A
    Biomed Res Int; 2014; 2014():214829. PubMed ID: 24587983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Predicting conversion to glaucoma using standard automated perimetry and frequency doubling technology.
    Takahashi G; Demirel S; Johnson CA
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2017 Apr; 255(4):797-803. PubMed ID: 28110356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [Application of oculokinetic perimetry in examination of the eye].
    Wakakura M; Kageyama M; Hamanaka T; Shimizu K; Joshita H; Shimizu T; Baba H; Kisara M; Miyata M
    Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi; 1996 Jul; 100(7):551-7. PubMed ID: 8741340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Clinical experiences with the use of an automated perimeter (Octopus) in the diagnosis and management of patients with glaucoma and neurologic diseases.
    Li SG; Spaeth GL; Scimeca HA; Schatz NJ; Savino PJ
    Ophthalmology; 1979 Jul; 86(7):1302-16. PubMed ID: 233862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.