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
211 related items for PubMed ID: 31697732
21. Evidence-based Criteria for Assessment of Visual Field Reliability. Yohannan J, Wang J, Brown J, Chauhan BC, Boland MV, Friedman DS, Ramulu PY. Ophthalmology; 2017 Nov; 124(11):1612-1620. PubMed ID: 28676280 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Comparison of the TEMPO binocular perimeter and Humphrey field analyzer. Nishida T, Weinreb RN, Arias J, Vasile C, Moghimi S. Sci Rep; 2023 Dec 01; 13(1):21189. PubMed ID: 38040803 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Comparison of Compass and Humphrey perimeters in detecting glaucomatous defects. Fogagnolo P, Modarelli A, Oddone F, Digiuni M, Montesano G, Orzalesi N, Rossetti L. Eur J Ophthalmol; 2016 Nov 04; 26(6):598-606. PubMed ID: 27375066 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Comparison of imo and Humphrey field analyzer perimeters in glaucomatous eyes. Nakai Y, Bessho K, Shono Y, Taoka K, Nakai Y. Int J Ophthalmol; 2021 Nov 04; 14(12):1882-1887. PubMed ID: 34926203 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Comparison of the Humphrey Field Analyser and Humphrey Matrix Perimeter for the evaluation of glaucoma patients. Chen YH, Wu JN, Chen JT, Lu DW. Ophthalmologica; 2008 Nov 04; 222(6):400-7. PubMed ID: 18781091 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. 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 Nov 04; 5(3):275-283. PubMed ID: 34537412 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Performance of frequency-doubling technology perimetry in a population-based prevalence survey of glaucoma: the Tajimi study. Iwase A, Tomidokoro A, Araie M, Shirato S, Shimizu H, Kitazawa Y, Tajimi Study Group. Ophthalmology; 2007 Jan 04; 114(1):27-32. PubMed ID: 17070580 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Agreement in the detection of chiasmal and postchiasmal visual field defects between imo binocular random single-eye test and Humphrey monocular test. Sakamoto M, Sawamura H, Aihara M, Goseki T, Ikeda T, Ishikawa H, Nakamura M. Jpn J Ophthalmol; 2022 Sep 04; 66(5):413-424. PubMed ID: 35972588 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. 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 04; 3(2):100264. PubMed ID: 36846107 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. 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]
39. Retinal Sensitivity Thresholds Obtained Through Easyfield and Humphrey Perimeters in Eyes with Glaucoma: A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study. Nazareth T, Rocha J, Scoralick ALB, Dias DT, Gracitelli CPB, Kanadani FN, Prata TS. Clin Ophthalmol; 2020 Apr 01; 14():4201-4207. PubMed ID: 33299296 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Reversal of Glaucoma Hemifield Test Results and Visual Field Features in Glaucoma. Wang M, Pasquale LR, Shen LQ, Boland MV, Wellik SR, De Moraes CG, Myers JS, Wang H, Baniasadi N, Li D, Silva RNE, Bex PJ, Elze T. Ophthalmology; 2018 Mar 01; 125(3):352-360. PubMed ID: 29103791 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]