ライフサイエンスコーパス: standard automated perimetry

1 t of 3 consecutive abnormal visual fields on standard automated perimetry.

2 in optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and standard automated perimetry.

3 rimetric sensitivity for reliable testing by standard automated perimetry.

4 high-risk ocular hypertension and performed standard automated perimetry.

5 ent, gonioscopy, dilated ophthalmoscopy, and standard automated perimetry.

6 Visual fields were obtained with standard automated perimetry.

7 re evaluated by the mean deviation (MD) from standard automated perimetry.

8 ased on visual field index (VFI) values from standard automated perimetry.

9 d based on the visual field index (VFI) from standard automated perimetry.

10 ared against an existing standard technique--standard automated perimetry.

11 ices are available to summarize results from standard automated perimetry.

12 System and also by mean deviation (MD) from standard automated perimetry.

13 aluated with all three tests as well as with standard automated perimetry.

14 ather than based on isolated parameters from standard automated perimetry (8.5%) or optical coherence

15 All tests were performed with standard automated perimetry and a 24-2 test pattern.

16 coma were examined at 4-month intervals with standard automated perimetry and confocal scanning laser

17 Subjects underwent standard automated perimetry and optical coherence tomog

18 Estimates of RGC counts were obtained from standard automated perimetry and optical coherence tomog

19 VF examinations were performed using standard automated perimetry and rates of change were ca

20 having repeatable visual field defects with standard automated perimetry) and 189 subjects without g

21 pants underwent a full clinical examination, standard automated perimetry, and imaging with time-doma

22 complete examination, including gonioscopy, standard automated perimetry, and stereoscopic optic dis

23 time-domain optical coherence tomography and standard automated perimetry every 6 months.

24 Algorithm is replacing Full-Threshold as the standard automated perimetry gold-standard strategy, and

25 ptic disc stereophotograph assessment and/or standard automated perimetry guided progression analysis

26 ten based on pointwise sensitivity data from standard automated perimetry; however, frequency-of seei

27 Standard automated perimetry is being adapted and improv

28 Standard automated perimetry is the current criterion st

29 perior RNFL thickness may predict subsequent standard automated perimetry loss.

30 41 eyes with moderate to advanced glaucoma (standard automated perimetry mean deviation </=-8 dB) wa

31 The subjects were examined annually with standard automated perimetry, optic disc stereophotograp

32 HT with four or more visual field tests with standard automated perimetry over three or more years an

33 ckened pRNFL was significantly correlated to standard automated perimetry pattern deviations.

34 reliability indices to judge the quality of standard automated perimetry results are fixation losses

35 Recent studies did not consider standard automated perimetry results as part of inclusio

36 Ninety-nine eyes with repeatable standard automated perimetry results showing glaucomatou

37 omplete ophthalmologic examination including standard automated perimetry, retinal nerve fiber layer

38 ely determine how the reliability indices in standard automated perimetry (SAP) affect the global ind

39 Subjects were longitudinally monitored with standard automated perimetry (SAP) and confocal scanning

40 nd intertest variability components for both standard automated perimetry (SAP) and frequency-doublin

41 Patients were monitored with standard automated perimetry (SAP) and had longitudinal

42 (GAT; 45, 95% CrI 17-68), whereas threshold standard automated perimetry (SAP) and Heidelberg Retina

43 All subjects had standard automated perimetry (SAP) and optical coherence

44 All eyes underwent testing with standard automated perimetry (SAP) and spectral-domain o

45 Patients were tested with standard automated perimetry (SAP) at 6-month intervals,

46 ionnaire (NEI VFQ-25) performed annually and standard automated perimetry (SAP) at 6-month intervals.

47 ionnaire (NEI VFQ)-25 performed annually and standard automated perimetry (SAP) at 6-month intervals.

48 ients had repeatable visual field defects on standard automated perimetry (SAP) at baseline.

49 Participants had normal standard automated perimetry (SAP) at baseline.

50 were eligible, full threshold, pattern 24-2, standard automated perimetry (SAP) examinations (Humphre

51 was shown to segment clusters of patterns in standard automated perimetry (SAP) for glaucoma in previ

52 covariates TSS; disease severity, defined as standard automated perimetry (SAP) mean deviation [MD];

53 cal scanning laser ophthalmoscope (CSLO) and standard automated perimetry (SAP) measurements analyzed

54 cted to investigate the relationship between standard automated perimetry (SAP) measures of RGCs and

55 ified as glaucomatous by repeatable abnormal standard automated perimetry (SAP) or progressive glauco

56 An analysis of normative data for standard automated perimetry (SAP) sensitivities and opt

57 Standard automated perimetry (SAP) shows a marked increa

58 participants underwent at least one reliable standard automated perimetry (SAP) test, while RNFL meas

59 oherence tomography (OCT) RNFL thickness and standard automated perimetry (SAP) visual field loss wer

60 These eyes had normal standard automated perimetry (SAP) visual fields at base

61 along with optic disc stereophotographs and standard automated perimetry (SAP) visual fields.

62 along with optic disc stereophotographs and standard automated perimetry (SAP) visual fields.

63 eripapillary NFL thicknesses were mapped and standard automated perimetry (SAP) was performed.

64 , high-pass resolution perimetry (HPRP), and standard automated perimetry (SAP) were performed.

65 r different rates of visual field loss using standard automated perimetry (SAP) when considering diff

66 ants underwent testing with a BCI device and standard automated perimetry (SAP) within 3 months.

67 ionship between visual function, measured by standard automated perimetry (SAP), and retinal nerve fi

68 All eyes had standard automated perimetry (SAP), Cirrus SD-OCT, and s

69 All eyes underwent standard automated perimetry (SAP), GDxVCC, and GDxECC i

70 ltifocal visual evoked potential (mfVEP) and standard automated perimetry (SAP), in eyes with high-ri

71 All eyes underwent standard automated perimetry (SAP), spectral-domain opti

72 The first can be observed by Standard Automated Perimetry (SAP), the second by Optic

73 repeatable (either two or three consecutive) standard automated perimetry (SAP)-detected abnormalitie

74 ined from early kinetic perimetry to current standard automated perimetry (SAP).

75 g, Germany), along with IOP measurements and standard automated perimetry (SAP).

76 unction Questionnaire (NEI VFQ-25), FDT, and standard automated perimetry (SAP).

77 ), to the loss in sensitivity, measured with standard automated perimetry (SAP).

78 using a retina tomograph and white-on-white standard automated perimetry (SAP).

79 Patients were examined every 4 months with standard automated perimetry (SAP, SITA Standard, 24-2 t

80 e tested on HRT II, StratusOCT, GDx VCC, and standard automated perimetry (SAP, with the Swedish Inte

81 esults in a Glaucoma Hemifield Test [GHT] on standard automated perimetry [SAP] 24-2 fields) and RNFL

82 the Guided Progression Analysis software for standard automated perimetry [SAP] and by masked assessm

83 rmalities (GS: mean age 56.6 +/- 13.8 years, standard automated perimetry [SAP] mean deviation [MD] -

84 retest variability of four perimetry tests: standard automated perimetry size III (SAP III), with th

85 cipate in a prospective evaluation including standard automated perimetry, spectral-domain optical co

86 pecific perimetry may be influenced by which standard automated perimetry technique is used as the re

87 pillary responses were evaluated relative to standard automated perimetry testing (Humphrey Visual Fi

88 coherence tomography (OCT) of the RNFL, and standard automated perimetry testing at 6-month interval

89 Age-adjusted standard automated perimetry thresholds, along with othe

90 up for an average of 4.5 +/- 0.8 years with standard automated perimetry visual fields and optical c

91 y were consecutively recruited and underwent standard automated perimetry, visual acuity measurement,

92 At each visit, standard automated perimetry was conducted on each eye,

93 Standard automated perimetry was done using the 24-2 Swe

94 n-EDI) and EDI modes, ultrasound B-scan, and standard automated perimetry were performed on both eyes