299 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7601645)
1. Repeatability of the Glaucoma Hemifield Test in automated perimetry.
Katz J; Quigley HA; Sommer A
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1995 Jul; 36(8):1658-64. PubMed ID: 7601645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparing multifocal VEP and standard automated perimetry in high-risk ocular hypertension and early glaucoma.
Fortune B; Demirel S; Zhang X; Hood DC; Patterson E; Jamil A; Mansberger SL; Cioffi GA; Johnson CA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2007 Mar; 48(3):1173-80. PubMed ID: 17325161
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Visual function-specific perimetry for indirect comparison of different ganglion cell populations in glaucoma.
Sample PA; Bosworth CF; Blumenthal EZ; Girkin C; Weinreb RN
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2000 Jun; 41(7):1783-90. PubMed ID: 10845599
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The efficacy of the dicon screening field to detect eyes with glaucomatous field loss by Humphrey threshold testing.
Huang AS; Smith SD; Quigley HA
J Glaucoma; 1998 Jun; 7(3):158-64. PubMed ID: 9627854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Relationship between Humphrey 30-2 SITA Standard Test, Matrix 30-2 threshold test, and Heidelberg retina tomograph in ocular hypertensive and glaucoma patients.
Bozkurt B; Yilmaz PT; Irkec M
J Glaucoma; 2008; 17(3):203-10. PubMed ID: 18414106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Blue-on-yellow visual field and retinal nerve fiber layer in ocular hypertension and glaucoma.
Teesalu P; Airaksinen PJ; Tuulonen A
Ophthalmology; 1998 Nov; 105(11):2077-81. PubMed ID: 9818609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Frequency doubling technology perimetry in open-angle glaucoma eyes with hemifield visual field damage: comparison of high-tension and normal-tension groups.
Murata H; Tomidokoro A; Matsuo H; Tomita G; Araie M
J Glaucoma; 2007 Jan; 16(1):9-13. PubMed ID: 17224743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Frequency-doubling perimetry: comparison with standard automated perimetry to detect glaucoma.
Leeprechanon N; Giangiacomo A; Fontana H; Hoffman D; Caprioli J
Am J Ophthalmol; 2007 Feb; 143(2):263-271. PubMed ID: 17178091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling perimetry.
Johnson CA; Samuels SJ
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1997 Feb; 38(2):413-25. PubMed ID: 9040475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Automated suprathreshold screening for glaucoma: the Baltimore Eye Survey.
Katz J; Tielsch JM; Quigley HA; Javitt J; Witt K; Sommer A
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1993 Nov; 34(12):3271-7. PubMed ID: 8225862
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Analysis of progressive change in automated visual fields in glaucoma.
Smith SD; Katz J; Quigley HA
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1996 Jun; 37(7):1419-28. PubMed ID: 8641844
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Frequency doubling technology perimetry abnormalities as predictors of glaucomatous visual field loss.
Medeiros FA; Sample PA; Weinreb RN
Am J Ophthalmol; 2004 May; 137(5):863-71. PubMed ID: 15126151
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The statistical interpretation of blue-on-yellow visual field loss.
Wild JM; Moss ID; Whitaker D; O'Neill EC
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1995 Jun; 36(7):1398-410. PubMed ID: 7775118
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Diagnostic sensitivity of fast blue-yellow and standard automated perimetry in early glaucoma: a comparison between different test programs.
Bengtsson B; Heijl A
Ophthalmology; 2006 Jul; 113(7):1092-7. PubMed ID: 16815399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Testing for glaucoma with frequency-doubling perimetry in normals, ocular hypertensives, and glaucoma patients.
Horn FK; Wakili N; Jünemann AM; Korth M
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2002 Aug; 240(8):658-65. PubMed ID: 12192460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Computer-assisted interpretation of visual fields in glaucoma.
Asman P
Acta Ophthalmol Suppl (1985); 1992; (206):1-47. PubMed ID: 1467748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evidence for a learning effect in short-wavelength automated perimetry.
Wild JM; Kim LS; Pacey IE; Cunliffe IA
Ophthalmology; 2006 Feb; 113(2):206-15. PubMed ID: 16458091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Visual field testing with the new Humphrey Matrix: a comparison between the FDT N-30 and Matrix N-30-F tests.
Brusini P; Salvetat ML; Zeppieri M; Tosoni C; Parisi L; Felletti M
Acta Ophthalmol Scand; 2006 Jun; 84(3):351-6. PubMed ID: 16704697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Scanning laser polarimetry using variable corneal compensation in the detection of glaucoma with localized visual field defects.
Kook MS; Cho HS; Seong M; Choi J
Ophthalmology; 2005 Nov; 112(11):1970-8. PubMed ID: 16185765
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
