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 *

193 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8493006)

  • 1. Evaluating the visual field effects of blepharoptosis using automated static perimetry.
    Meyer DR; Stern JH; Jarvis JM; Lininger LL
    Ophthalmology; 1993 May; 100(5):651-8; discussion 658-9. PubMed ID: 8493006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Comparison of automated and manual perimetry in patients with blepharoptosis.
    Alniemi ST; Pang NK; Woog JJ; Bradley EA
    Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg; 2013; 29(5):361-3. PubMed ID: 23924985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Octopus 900 Automated Kinetic Perimetry versus Standard Automated Static Perimetry in Glaucoma Practice.
    Rowe FJ; Czanner G; Somerville T; Sood I; Sood D
    Curr Eye Res; 2021 Jan; 46(1):83-95. PubMed ID: 32564629
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Tangent screen perimetry in the evaluation of visual field defects associated with ptosis and dermatochalasis.
    Fuller ML; Briceño CA; Nelson CC; Bradley EA
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(3):e0174607. PubMed ID: 28355310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Identification of functional visual field loss by automated static perimetry.
    Frisén L
    Acta Ophthalmol; 2014 Dec; 92(8):805-9. PubMed ID: 24698019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Quantitating the superior visual field loss associated with ptosis.
    Meyer DR; Linberg JV; Powell SR; Odom JV
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1989 Jun; 107(6):840-3. PubMed ID: 2730403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Confrontation visual field loss as a function of decibel sensitivity loss on automated static perimetry. Implications on the accuracy of confrontation visual field testing.
    Shahinfar S; Johnson LN; Madsen RW
    Ophthalmology; 1995 Jun; 102(6):872-7. PubMed ID: 7777293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Reclaiming the Periphery: Automated Kinetic Perimetry for Measuring Peripheral Visual Fields in Patients With Glaucoma.
    Mönter VM; Crabb DP; Artes PH
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2017 Feb; 58(2):868-875. PubMed ID: 28159974
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Automated suprathreshold static perimetry screening for detecting neuro-ophthalmologic disease.
    Siatkowski RM; Lam BL; Anderson DR; Feuer WJ; Halikman AM
    Ophthalmology; 1996 Jun; 103(6):907-17. PubMed ID: 8643246
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of central and peripheral visual field properties in the optic neuritis treatment trial.
    Keltner JL; Johnson CA; Spurr JO; Beck RW
    Am J Ophthalmol; 1999 Nov; 128(5):543-53. PubMed ID: 10577521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Automated differential threshold perimetry for detecting glaucomatous visual field loss.
    Duggan C; Sommer A; Auer C; Burkhard K
    Am J Ophthalmol; 1985 Sep; 100(3):420-3. PubMed ID: 4037029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Static and kinetic visual field testing. Reproducibility in normal volunteers.
    Parrish RK; Schiffman J; Anderson DR
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1984 Oct; 102(10):1497-502. PubMed ID: 6487115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Physiologic statokinetic dissociation is eliminated by equating static and kinetic perimetry testing procedures.
    Phu J; Al-Saleem N; Kalloniatis M; Khuu SK
    J Vis; 2016 Nov; 16(14):5. PubMed ID: 27829104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Progression of early glaucomatous visual field loss as detected by blue-on-yellow and standard white-on-white automated perimetry.
    Johnson CA; Adams AJ; Casson EJ; Brandt JD
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1993 May; 111(5):651-6. PubMed ID: 8489448
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Automated combined kinetic and static perimetry: an alternative to standard perimetry in patients with neuro-ophthalmic disease and glaucoma.
    Pineles SL; Volpe NJ; Miller-Ellis E; Galetta SL; Sankar PS; Shindler KS; Maguire MG
    Arch Ophthalmol; 2006 Mar; 124(3):363-9. PubMed ID: 16534056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Correlation between static automated and scanning laser entoptic perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients.
    Plummer DJ; Lopez A; Azen SP; LaBree L; Bartsch DU; Sadun AA; Freeman WR
    Ophthalmology; 2000 Sep; 107(9):1693-701. PubMed ID: 10964832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Glaucoma Hemifield Test. Automated visual field evaluation.
    Asman P; Heijl A
    Arch Ophthalmol; 1992 Jun; 110(6):812-9. PubMed ID: 1596230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of long-term variability for standard and short-wavelength automated perimetry in stable glaucoma patients.
    Blumenthal EZ; Sample PA; Zangwill L; Lee AC; Kono Y; Weinreb RN
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2000 Mar; 129(3):309-13. PubMed ID: 10704545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.