206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9373125)
1. A multicenter comparison study of the Humphrey Field Analyzer I and the Humphrey Field Analyzer II.
Johnson CA; Cioffi GA; Drance SM; Gaasterland D; Mills RP; Ashburn F; Hnik P; Van Coevorden RE
Ophthalmology; 1997 Nov; 104(11):1910-7. PubMed ID: 9373125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Correlation between high-pass resolution perimetry and standard threshold perimetry in subjects with glaucoma and ocular hypertension.
Iester M; Capris P; Altieri M; Zingirian M; Traverso CE
Int Ophthalmol; 1999; 23(2):99-103. PubMed ID: 11196128
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparing the Performance of Compass Perimetry With Humphrey Field Analyzer in Eyes With Glaucoma.
Rao HL; Raveendran S; James V; Dasari S; Palakurthy M; Reddy HB; Pradhan ZS; Rao DA; Puttaiah NK; Devi S
J Glaucoma; 2017 Mar; 26(3):292-297. PubMed ID: 27977480
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of visual field sensitivities between the Medmont automated perimeter and the Humphrey field analyser.
Landers J; Sharma A; Goldberg I; Graham SL
Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2010 Apr; 38(3):273-6. PubMed ID: 20447123
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Six-month Longitudinal Comparison of a Portable Tablet Perimeter With the Humphrey Field Analyzer.
Prea SM; Kong YXG; Mehta A; He M; Crowston JG; Gupta V; Martin KR; Vingrys AJ
Am J Ophthalmol; 2018 Jun; 190():9-16. PubMed ID: 29550190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of Perimetric Outcomes from a Tablet Perimeter, Smart Visual Function Analyzer, and Humphrey Field Analyzer.
Kang J; De Arrigunaga S; Freeman SE; Zhao Y; Lin M; Liebman DL; Roldan AM; Kim JA; Chang DS; Friedman DS; Elze T
Ophthalmol Glaucoma; 2023; 6(5):509-520. PubMed ID: 36918066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Agreement in detecting glaucomatous visual field progression by using guided progression analysis ?and Humphrey overview printout.
Iester M; Corallo G; Capris E; Capris P
Eur J Ophthalmol; 2011; 21(5):573-9. PubMed ID: 21319135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Association of reliability with reproducibility of the glaucomatous visual field.
McMillan TA; Stewart WC; Hunt HH
Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh); 1992 Oct; 70(5):665-70. PubMed ID: 1471493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. A comparison of global indices between the Medmont Automated Perimeter and the Humphrey Field Analyzer.
Landers J; Sharma A; Goldberg I; Graham S
Br J Ophthalmol; 2007 Oct; 91(10):1285-7. PubMed ID: 17389740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Predicting Humphrey 10-2 visual field from 24-2 visual field in eyes with advanced glaucoma.
Sugisaki K; Asaoka R; Inoue T; Yoshikawa K; Kanamori A; Yamazaki Y; Ishikawa S; Nemoto H; Iwase A; Araie M
Br J Ophthalmol; 2020 May; 104(5):642-647. PubMed ID: 31481390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of Matrix with Humphrey Field Analyzer II with SITA.
Fredette MJ; Giguère A; Anderson DR; Budenz DL; McSoley J
Optom Vis Sci; 2015 May; 92(5):527-36. PubMed ID: 25875683
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of Visual Field Measurement with Heidelberg Edge Perimeter and Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer in Patients with Ocular Hypertension.
Kaczorowski K; Mulak M; Szumny D; Baranowska M; Jakubaszko-Jabłońska J; Misiuk-Hojło M
Adv Clin Exp Med; 2016; 25(5):937-944. PubMed ID: 28028959
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Baseline visual field characteristics in the ocular hypertension treatment study.
Johnson CA; Keltner JL; Cello KE; Edwards M; Kass MA; Gordon MO; Budenz DL; Gaasterland DE; Werner E;
Ophthalmology; 2002 Mar; 109(3):432-7. PubMed ID: 11874743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison between indices of Humphrey matrix and Humphrey perimetry in early glaucoma patients and normal subjects.
Hong S; Yeom HY; Kim CY; Seong GJ
Ann Ophthalmol (Skokie); 2007; 39(4):318-20. PubMed ID: 18025653
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Frequency doubling technique in patients with ocular hypertension and glaucoma: correlation with octopus perimeter indices.
Iester M; Mermoud A; Schnyder C
Ophthalmology; 2000 Feb; 107(2):288-94. PubMed ID: 10690827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Multicenter Comparison of the Toronto Portable Perimeter with the Humphrey Field Analyzer: A Pilot Study.
Ahmed Y; Pereira A; Bowden S; Shi RB; Li Y; Ahmed IIK; Arshinoff SA
Ophthalmol Glaucoma; 2022; 5(2):146-159. PubMed ID: 34358734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Static threshold visual field in glaucoma with the Fastpac algorithm of the Humphrey Field Analyser. Is the gain in examination time offset by any loss of information?
Nordmann JP; Denis P; Nguer Y; Mouton-Chopin D; Saraux H
Eur J Ophthalmol; 1994; 4(2):105-10. PubMed ID: 7950333
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Detection of glaucomatous visual field defect using a screening program of Humphrey Field Analyzer.
Hong C; Song KY; Youn DH; Park WH
Korean J Ophthalmol; 1990 Jun; 4(1):23-5. PubMed ID: 2214247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparison between Fundus Automated Perimetry and Humphrey Field Analyzer: Performance and usability of the Fundus Automated Perimetry and Humphrey Field Analyzer in healthy, ocular hypertensive, and glaucomatous patients.
Morbio R; Longo C; De Vitto AML; Comacchio F; Della Porta LB; Marchini G
Eur J Ophthalmol; 2021 Jul; 31(4):1850-1856. PubMed ID: 32722931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
