๐”– Bobbio Scriptorium
โœฆ   LIBER   โœฆ

Comparison of visual field sensitivities between the Medmont automated perimeter and the Humphrey field analyser

โœ Scribed by John Landers; Alok Sharma; Ivan Goldberg; Stuart L Graham

Book ID
115180947
Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
2010
Tongue
English
Weight
231 KB
Volume
38
Category
Article
ISSN
1442-6404

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

๐Ÿ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES

Discrepancies between single stimulus an
Discrepancies between single stimulus and multiple stimulus visual field examinations with the Peritest semi-automated perimeter in glaucoma patients
โœ C. T. Langerhorst; D. Bakker; J. Felius; T. J. T. P. Berg ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1992 ๐Ÿ› Springer-Verlag ๐ŸŒ English โš– 283 KB

In a total of 24 randomly selected eyes of glaucoma patients, tested with the automated (single stimulus) and the manual (multiple stimulus) modes of the semi-automated Peritest perimeter, the numbers and depths of defects were compared as estimated with these two different measurement strategies. I

A comparison of unweighted and fluctuati
A comparison of unweighted and fluctuation-weighted indices (within the central 28ยฐ of glaucomatous visual fields measured with the Octopus automated perimeter)
โœ A. T. Funkhouser; F. Fankhauser ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1991 ๐Ÿ› Springer Netherlands ๐ŸŒ English โš– 393 KB

The main visual field indices of Flammer and the analogous ones of Heijl have been compared based on a population of 113 glaucomatous visual fields. It is shown that for the population studied, the differences between the two sets of indices are negligible for Octopus G1 program results and that the