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 *

115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9559480)

  • 1. Validation of a handheld automated keratometer in adults.
    Noonan CP; Rao GP; Kaye SB; Green JR; Chandna A
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 1998 Mar; 24(3):411-4. PubMed ID: 9559480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Intraoperative PAR corneal topography system (CTS): comparison of its keratometric readings to manual keratometer, auto-keratometer, EyeSys Corneal Analysis system, and slit lamp PAR CTS in healthy eyes.
    Uçakhan OO; Sternberg G; Bodian C; Kelliher K; Asbell PA
    CLAO J; 2000 Jul; 26(3):151-8. PubMed ID: 10946987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Agreement between Pentacam and handheld Auto-Refractor/Keratometer for keratometry measurement.
    Hashemi H; Heydarian S; Ali Yekta A; Aghamirsalim M; Ahmadi-Pishkuhi M; Valadkhan M; Ostadimoghaddam H; Amiri AA; Khabazkhoob M
    J Optom; 2019; 12(4):232-239. PubMed ID: 31300242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Measurement of corneal curvature after corneal transplantation and radial keratotomy using standard and automated keratometry.
    Binder PS
    CLAO J; 1989; 15(3):201-6. PubMed ID: 2673574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of instrument rotation on handheld keratometry.
    Lam AK; Chan R; Chiu R
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2004 Dec; 30(12):2590-4. PubMed ID: 15617929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Corneal power measurements in fixating versus anesthetized nonfixating children using a handheld keratometer.
    Rogers DL; Whitehead GR; Stephens JA; Fellows RR; Bremer DL; McGregor ML; Golden RP; Cassady CB; Rogers GL
    J AAPOS; 2010 Feb; 14(1):11-4. PubMed ID: 20227615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of posture and artificial tears on corneal power measurements with a handheld automated keratometer.
    Lam AK; Chan R; Chiu R
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2004 Mar; 30(3):645-52. PubMed ID: 15050262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. An evaluation of keratometry in 6-year-old children.
    Huynh SC; Mai TQ; Kifley A; Wang JJ; Rose KA; Mitchell P
    Cornea; 2006 May; 25(4):383-7. PubMed ID: 16670473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of the Corneal Power Measurements with the TMS4-Topographer, Pentacam HR, IOL Master, and Javal Keratometer.
    Dehnavi Z; Khabazkhoob M; Mirzajani A; Jabbarvand M; Yekta A; Jafarzadehpur E
    Middle East Afr J Ophthalmol; 2015; 22(2):233-7. PubMed ID: 25949084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Short-term repeatability of hand-held keratometry measurements.
    Shin JA; Manny RE; Kleinstein RN; Mutti DO; Zadnik K
    Optom Vis Sci; 1999 Apr; 76(4):247-53. PubMed ID: 10333188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of refractive outcomes using five devices for the assessment of preoperative corneal power.
    Whang WJ; Byun YS; Joo CK
    Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2012 Jul; 40(5):425-32. PubMed ID: 22394318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Clinical evaluation of keratometry and computerised videokeratography: intraobserver and interobserver variability on normal and astigmatic corneas.
    Karabatsas CH; Cook SD; Papaefthymiou J; Turner P; Sparrow JM
    Br J Ophthalmol; 1998 Jun; 82(6):637-42. PubMed ID: 9797664
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effect of general anesthesia and muscle relaxants on keratometry measurements using a handheld keratometer.
    Al-Haddad C; Jurdy L; Farhat A; Farah F; Aouad M
    J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus; 2014; 51(5):308-12. PubMed ID: 25036105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Comparability and repeatability of corneal astigmatism measurements using different measurement technologies.
    Visser N; Berendschot TT; Verbakel F; de Brabander J; Nuijts RM
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2012 Oct; 38(10):1764-70. PubMed ID: 22999600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of keratometry and videokeratography after penetrating keratoplasty.
    Karabatsas CH; Cook SD; Powell K; Sparrow JM
    J Refract Surg; 1998; 14(4):420-6. PubMed ID: 9699166
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Precision and agreement of corneal power measurements obtained using a new corneal topographer OphthaTOP.
    Huang J; Savini G; Chen H; Bao F; Li Y; Chen H; Lu W; Yu Y; Wang Q
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(1):e109414. PubMed ID: 25559203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Repeatability and comparability of automated keratometry: the Nikon NRK-8000, the Nidek KM-800 and the Bausch and Lomb keratometer.
    Elliott M; Simpson T; Richter D; Fonn D
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 1998 May; 18(3):285-93. PubMed ID: 9829116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Repeatability and reproducibility of a new optical biometer in normal and keratoconic eyes.
    Yağcı R; Güler E; Kulak AE; Erdoğan BD; Balcı M; Hepşen İF
    J Cataract Refract Surg; 2015 Jan; 41(1):171-7. PubMed ID: 25532643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Repeatability and reproducibility of biometry and keratometry measurements using a noncontact optical low-coherence reflectometer and keratometer.
    Shammas HJ; Hoffer KJ
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2012 Jan; 153(1):55-61.e2. PubMed ID: 21907967
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of corneal powers obtained from 4 different devices.
    Shirayama M; Wang L; Weikert MP; Koch DD
    Am J Ophthalmol; 2009 Oct; 148(4):528-535.e1. PubMed ID: 19541287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.