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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

219 related items for PubMed ID: 27847689

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Measuring Visual Fields in Children With Glaucoma Using a Portable Tablet.
    Gupta V, Kong GXY, Singh A, Panigrahi A, Gupta S, Prea S, Vingrys AJ.
    Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2024 May 01; 13(5):10. PubMed ID: 38743410
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. 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 01; 190():9-16. PubMed ID: 29550190
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Comparison of Perimetric Outcomes from Melbourne Rapid Fields Tablet Perimeter Software and Humphrey Field Analyzer in Glaucoma Patients.
    Kumar H, Thulasidas M.
    J Ophthalmol; 2020 Jun 01; 2020():8384509. PubMed ID: 32908686
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. 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 Jun 01; 6(5):509-520. PubMed ID: 36918066
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Glaucoma Screening Using an iPad-Based Visual Field Test in a West African Population.
    Prince J, Thompson A, Mwanza JC, Tolleson-Rinehart S, Budenz DL.
    Ophthalmol Glaucoma; 2022 Jun 01; 5(3):275-283. PubMed ID: 34537412
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Evaluation of the Melbourne Rapid Fields Test Procedure.
    Harris PA, Johnson CA, Chen Y, Fann H, Gafford G, Kim YJ, Mezgebu ED.
    Optom Vis Sci; 2022 Apr 01; 99(4):372-382. PubMed ID: 35383736
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Performance of iPad-based threshold perimetry in glaucoma and controls.
    Schulz AM, Graham EC, You Y, Klistorner A, Graham SL.
    Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2018 May 01; 46(4):346-355. PubMed ID: 28976067
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Perimetric Comparison Between the IMOvifa and Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Nishida T, Eslani M, Weinreb RN, Arias J, Vasile C, Mohammadzadeh V, Moghimi S.
    J Glaucoma; 2023 Feb 01; 32(2):85-92. PubMed ID: 36223309
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Test Reliability and Compliance to a Twelve-Month Visual Field Telemedicine Study in Glaucoma Patients.
    Prea SM, Vingrys AJ, Kong GYX.
    J Clin Med; 2022 Jul 25; 11(15):. PubMed ID: 35893408
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Comparative Analysis of 10-2 Test on Advanced Vision Analyzer and Humphrey Perimeter in Glaucoma.
    Narang P, Agarwal A, Agarwal A, Narang R, Sundaramoorthy L.
    Ophthalmol Sci; 2023 Jun 25; 3(2):100264. PubMed ID: 36846107
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. 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 Jun 25; 5(2):146-159. PubMed ID: 34358734
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. 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 25; 31(4):1850-1856. PubMed ID: 32722931
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Comparison of the visual field test of Glaufield Lite with Humphrey Field Analyser.
    Behera G, Waghmare SV, Ramasamy A.
    Int Ophthalmol; 2023 Feb 25; 43(2):557-565. PubMed ID: 35947251
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Comparison of head-mounted perimeter (imo®) and Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Kimura T, Matsumoto C, Nomoto H.
    Clin Ophthalmol; 2019 Feb 25; 13():501-513. PubMed ID: 30936681
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Comparison of a Novel Head-Mounted Objective Auto-perimetry (Gaze Analyzing Perimeter) and Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Miyake M, Mori Y, Wada S, Yamada K, Shiraishi R, Numa S, Suda K, Kameda T, Ikeda H, Akagi T, Aibara T, Tamura H, Tsujikawa A.
    Ophthalmol Glaucoma; 2024 Feb 25; 7(5):445-453. PubMed ID: 38823680
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Personal Computer-Based Visual Field Testing as an Alternative to Standard Automated Perimetry.
    Khizer MA, Khan TA, Ijaz U, Khan S, Rehmatullah AK, Zahid I, Shah HG, Zahid MA, Sarfaraz H, Khurshid N.
    Cureus; 2022 Dec 25; 14(12):e32094. PubMed ID: 36601199
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Comparison of the Performance of a Novel, Smartphone-based, Head-mounted Perimeter (GearVision) With the Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Pradhan ZS, Sircar T, Agrawal H, Rao HL, Bopardikar A, Devi S, Tiwari VN.
    J Glaucoma; 2021 Apr 01; 30(4):e146-e152. PubMed ID: 33596021
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 11.