191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9373488)
1. Visual acuity scored by the letter-by-letter or probit methods has lower retest variability than the line assignment method.
Vanden Bosch ME; Wall M
Eye (Lond); 1997; 11 ( Pt 3)():411-7. PubMed ID: 9373488
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The Thai logarithmic visual acuity chart.
Ruamviboonsuk P; Tiensuwan M
J Med Assoc Thai; 2002 Jun; 85(6):673-81. PubMed ID: 12322840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. An evaluation of the M&S technologies smart system II for visual acuity measurement in young visually-normal adults.
McClenaghan N; Kimura A; Stark LR
Optom Vis Sci; 2007 Mar; 84(3):218-23. PubMed ID: 17435535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Effect of letter separation on computerised visual acuity measurements: comparison with the gold standard Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) chart.
Shah N; Laidlaw DA; Brown G; Robson C
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2010 Mar; 30(2):200-3. PubMed ID: 20444125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. On the statistical reliability of letter-chart visual acuity measurements.
Arditi A; Cagenello R
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 1993 Jan; 34(1):120-9. PubMed ID: 8425819
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Comparison of visual acuity measured using Landolt-C and ETDRS charts in healthy subjects and patients with various eye diseases].
Becker R; Teichler G; Gräf M
Klin Monbl Augenheilkd; 2011 Oct; 228(10):864-7. PubMed ID: 21997822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. [Repeatability and reliability of the visual acuity examination on logMAR ETDRS and Snellen chart].
Veselý P; Synek S
Cesk Slov Oftalmol; 2012 May; 68(2):71-5. PubMed ID: 22913870
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Validation of a computerised logMAR visual acuity measurement system (COMPlog): comparison with ETDRS and the electronic ETDRS testing algorithm in adults and amblyopic children.
Laidlaw DA; Tailor V; Shah N; Atamian S; Harcourt C
Br J Ophthalmol; 2008 Feb; 92(2):241-4. PubMed ID: 17993577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Performance of a computerised visual acuity measurement device in subjects with age-related macular degeneration: comparison with gold standard ETDRS chart measurements.
Bokinni Y; Shah N; Maguire O; Laidlaw DA
Eye (Lond); 2015 Aug; 29(8):1085-91. PubMed ID: 26043703
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Visual acuities "hand motion" and "counting fingers" can be quantified with the freiburg visual acuity test.
Schulze-Bonsel K; Feltgen N; Burau H; Hansen L; Bach M
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Mar; 47(3):1236-40. PubMed ID: 16505064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Computer-based test to measure optimal visual acuity in age-related macular degeneration.
González EG; Tarita-Nistor L; Markowitz SN; Steinbach MJ
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2007 Oct; 48(10):4838-45. PubMed ID: 17898311
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Reproducibility of visual acuity assessment in normal and low visual acuity.
Becker R; Teichler G; Gräf M
Strabismus; 2007; 15(1):3-6. PubMed ID: 17523039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Computerized repeating and averaging improve the test-retest variability of ETDRS visual acuity measurements: implications for sensitivity and specificity.
Shah N; Laidlaw DA; Shah SP; Sivasubramaniam S; Bunce C; Cousens S
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2011 Dec; 52(13):9397-402. PubMed ID: 22003109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effect of scoring and termination rules on test-retest variability of a novel high-pass letter acuity chart.
Shah N; Dakin SC; Whitaker HL; Anderson RS
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2014 Mar; 55(3):1386-92. PubMed ID: 24519424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Computer-based measurement of letter and word acuity.
Whatham AR; Mermoud C; Déruaz A; Goldschmidt M; Zesiger P; Safran AB
Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2006 Mar; 26(2):156-68. PubMed ID: 16460316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. ETDRS-fast: implementing psychophysical adaptive methods to standardized visual acuity measurement with ETDRS charts.
Camparini M; Cassinari P; Ferrigno L; Macaluso C
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2001 May; 42(6):1226-31. PubMed ID: 11328731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A modified ETDRS visual acuity chart for European-wide use.
Plainis S; Tzatzala P; Orphanos Y; Tsilimbaris MK
Optom Vis Sci; 2007 Jul; 84(7):647-53. PubMed ID: 17632314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparing LEA numbers low vision book and Feinbloom visual acuity charts.
Hardgrave N; Hatley J; Lewerenz D
Optom Vis Sci; 2012 Nov; 89(11):1611-8. PubMed ID: 23026789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of the amblyopia treatment study HOTV and electronic-early treatment of diabetic retinopathy study visual acuity protocols in children aged 5 to 12 years.
Rice ML; Leske DA; Holmes JM
Am J Ophthalmol; 2004 Feb; 137(2):278-82. PubMed ID: 14962417
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Test-retest variability for standard automated perimetry and short-wavelength automated perimetry in diabetic patients.
Bengtsson B; Hellgren KJ; Agardh E
Acta Ophthalmol; 2008 Mar; 86(2):170-6. PubMed ID: 17935606
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
