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

206 related items for PubMed ID: 36249304

  • 1. Advanced Vision Analyzer-Virtual Reality Perimeter: Device Validation, Functional Correlation and Comparison with Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Narang P, Agarwal A, Srinivasan M, Agarwal A.
    Ophthalmol Sci; 2021 Jun; 1(2):100035. PubMed ID: 36249304
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. 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; 3(2):100264. PubMed ID: 36846107
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Comparing a head-mounted virtual reality perimeter and the Humphrey Field Analyzer for visual field testing in healthy and glaucoma patients.
    Phu J, Wang H, Kalloniatis M.
    Ophthalmic Physiol Opt; 2024 Jan; 44(1):83-95. PubMed ID: 37803502
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. A Comparison between the Compass Fundus Perimeter and the Humphrey Field Analyzer.
    Montesano G, Bryan SR, Crabb DP, Fogagnolo P, Oddone F, McKendrick AM, Turpin A, Lanzetta P, Perdicchi A, Johnson CA, Garway-Heath DF, Brusini P, Rossetti LM.
    Ophthalmology; 2019 Feb; 126(2):242-251. PubMed ID: 30114416
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 6. Comparison of Elisar-Fast and Sita-Fast Strategy for Visual Field Assessment in Glaucoma.
    Narang P, Rasheed FF, Agarwal A, Narang R, Agarwal A.
    J Glaucoma; 2024 Oct 02. PubMed ID: 39352408
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Comparison of Visual Field Test Measurements With a Novel Approach on a Wearable Headset to Standard Automated Perimetry.
    Johnson C, Sayed A, McSoley J, Durbin M, Kashem R, Nicklin A, Lopez V, Mijares G, Chen M, Shaheen A, Segarra S, Rady N, Duque CA, Opoku-Baah C, Abou Shousha M.
    J Glaucoma; 2023 Aug 01; 32(8):647-657. PubMed ID: 37311012
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 9. A Comparison of Perimetric Results from a Tablet Perimeter and Humphrey Field Analyzer in Glaucoma Patients.
    Kong YX, He M, Crowston JG, Vingrys AJ.
    Transl Vis Sci Technol; 2016 Nov 01; 5(6):2. PubMed ID: 27847689
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. 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]

  • 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. Comparative quantification of focal and diffuse visual field loss by the SPARK Precision threshold algorithm and SITA.
    Foo SK, Cubbidge RP, Heitmar R.
    Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol; 2022 Jun 01; 260(6):1983-1993. PubMed ID: 34962591
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. 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 Jun 01; 7(5):445-453. PubMed ID: 38823680
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma.
    Artes PH, Hutchison DM, Nicolela MT, LeBlanc RP, Chauhan BC.
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2005 Jul 01; 46(7):2451-7. PubMed ID: 15980235
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Assessment of false positives with the Humphrey Field Analyzer II perimeter with the SITA Algorithm.
    Newkirk MR, Gardiner SK, Demirel S, Johnson CA.
    Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci; 2006 Oct 01; 47(10):4632-7. PubMed ID: 17003461
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Validation of a Head-mounted Virtual Reality Visual Field Screening Device.
    Mees L, Upadhyaya S, Kumar P, Kotawala S, Haran S, Rajasekar S, Friedman DS, Venkatesh R.
    J Glaucoma; 2020 Feb 01; 29(2):86-91. PubMed ID: 31790067
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Quantification and Predictors of Visual Field Variability in Healthy, Glaucoma Suspect, and Glaucomatous Eyes Using SITA-Faster.
    Tan JCK, Agar A, Kalloniatis M, Phu J.
    Ophthalmology; 2024 Jun 01; 131(6):658-666. PubMed ID: 38110124
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. 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]

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