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 *

88 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7845691)

  • 1. Screening for glaucoma: the time taken by primary examiners to conduct visual field tests in practice.
    Tuck MW; Crick RP
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 1994 Oct; 14(4):351-5. PubMed ID: 7845691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Screening for glaucoma in the community by non-ophthalmologically trained staff using semi automated equipment.
    Vernon SA; Henry DJ; Cater L; Jones SJ
    Eye (Lond); 1990; 4 ( Pt 1)():89-97. PubMed ID: 2182352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Screening for glaucoma: age and sex of referrals and confirmed cases in England and Wales.
    Tuck MW; Crick RP
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 1992 Oct; 12(4):400-4. PubMed ID: 1293525
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Clinical implications of intra- and inter-reader agreement in four different automated visual fields.
    Alexander LJ; Corliss DA; Vinson C; Williams J; Casser L; Fingeret M; Malinovsky V; Townsend JC
    J Am Optom Assoc; 1995 Nov; 66(11):681-92. PubMed ID: 8576533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Different strategies for Humphrey automated perimetry: FASTPAC, SITA standard and SITA fast in normal subjects and glaucoma patients.
    Roggen X; Herman K; Van Malderen L; Devos M; Spileers W
    Bull Soc Belge Ophtalmol; 2001; (279):23-33. PubMed ID: 11344712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Performance of frequency-doubling technology perimetry in a population-based prevalence survey of glaucoma: the Tajimi study.
    Iwase A; Tomidokoro A; Araie M; Shirato S; Shimizu H; Kitazawa Y;
    Ophthalmology; 2007 Jan; 114(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 17070580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Effect of systolic blood pressure on the location of visual field defects in upper and lower visual half-fields in patients with chronic simple glaucoma].
    Gramer E; Althaus G
    Ophthalmologe; 1993 Dec; 90(6):620-5. PubMed ID: 8124024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Evaluation of the Humphrey perimetry programs SITA Standard and SITA Fast in normal probands and patients with glaucoma].
    Nordmann JP; Brion F; Hamard P; Mouton-Chopin D
    J Fr Ophtalmol; 1998 Oct; 21(8):549-54. PubMed ID: 9833219
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Detecting progressive visual field loss.
    Henson DB; Darling MN
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 1995 Sep; 15(5):387-90. PubMed ID: 8524561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Visual field progression in glaucoma: total versus pattern deviation analyses.
    Artes PH; Nicolela MT; LeBlanc RP; Chauhan BC
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Dec; 46(12):4600-6. PubMed ID: 16303955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Comparison of SKP (semi-automated kinetic perimetry) and SASP (suprathreshold automated static perimetry) techniques in patients with advanced glaucoma].
    Nowomiejska K; Paetzold J; Krapp E; Rejdak R; Zagórski Z; Schiefer U
    Klin Oczna; 2004; 106(1-2 Suppl):231-3. PubMed ID: 15510509
    [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. [The value of frequency doubling perimetry in glaucoma screening of aged 40 or more population].
    Li JJ; Xu L; Zhang RX; Sun XY; Yang H; Zou Y; Zhao JL
    Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi; 2005 Mar; 41(3):221-5. PubMed ID: 15840362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Validation of test duration as a screening criterion for frequency doubling perimetry.
    Thomas R; Parikh R; Muliyil J; Bhat S; George R
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2004 Mar; 137(3):562-3. PubMed ID: 15013885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The motion sensitivity screening test in clinical practice in abuja, Nigeria: affordable automated perimetry for the third world?
    Babalola OE
    Afr J Med Med Sci; 2005 Jun; 34(2):119-24. PubMed ID: 16749334
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. False-negative responses in glaucoma perimetry: indicators of patient performance or test reliability?
    Bengtsson B; Heijl A
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2000 Jul; 41(8):2201-4. PubMed ID: 10892863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.