ライフサイエンスコーパス: visual field

1 ne domains were biased toward the peripheral visual field.

2 al task - object localization throughout the visual field.

3 atterns and represent the same region of the visual field.

4 ies are biased toward different parts of the visual field.

5 aching objects in equivalent portions of the visual field.

6 uli at three closely spaced locations in the visual field.

7 otion that can appear at any location in the visual field.

8 ism that exerts its action across the entire visual field.

9 st as frequently in the optic disc as in the visual field.

10 ow-up and change in different regions of the visual field.

11 nt was normalised for sensitivity across the visual field.

12 as other neurons prefer motion of the entire visual field.

13 ase severity in the eye, optic radiation and visual field.

14 ns represent markedly different areas of the visual field.

15 ultraviolet dominated responses in the upper visual field.

16 t affords enhanced resolution in the frontal visual field.

17 same computation in different places of the visual field.

18 performed the task visually, in the central visual field.

19 processes retinotopic locations in the lower visual field.

20 sensitivity (MS) of the integrated binocular visual field.

21 ided by key biological structures within the visual field.

22 and ocular hypertensives with 24-2 and 10-2 visual fields.

23 6 with normal intraocular pressure (IOP) and visual fields.

24 on OCT angiography and with the scotomas on visual fields.

25 detected in visual acuity, color vision, or visual fields.

26 4-2 test were classified as abnormal on 10-2 visual fields.

27 es differently in the central and peripheral visual fields.

28 also matching with scotomas in the automated visual fields.

29 -2 tests were classified as abnormal on 10-2 visual fields.

30 eferentially the right one) using a Humphrey visual field 24-2 and 60-4.

31 they had greater than or equal to 5 Humphrey visual fields (24-2) conducted.

32 wed that each ocellus possesses two distinct visual fields-a focused monocular visual field suitable

33 For the classification of visual field abnormalities, 24-2 and 10-2 tests performe

34 glaucomatous optic neuropathy (GON) and 24-2 visual field abnormalities: early glaucoma (GON and abno

35 omes possible to select and analyse a common visual field across images of several serial section sta

36 ssion was found more often in the peripheral visual field, after the completion of the saccade.

37 dequate testing frequency are limitations in visual field analysis for glaucomatous progression.

38 illions of parallel channels for incremental visual field analysis.

39 tors, including the nature of the Functional Visual Field and existing similar ideas, alongside the i

40 is reveals the true nature of the functional visual field and its precise role in the conduct of visu

41 bjects may also occupy large portions of the visual field and occlude regions of the background optic

42 e two fixations in either the upper or lower visual field and the subject had to detect its location.

43 n dominated responses in the lower and nasal visual field and ultraviolet dominated responses in the

44 esented with more constriction of peripheral visual fields and had more dysfunction on ffERG and wors

45 d on consensus assessment by 3 clinicians of visual fields and optic disc photographs.

46 Though visual fields and prVEP responses demonstrate evidence o

47 els [dB]), glaucoma suspects (GON and normal visual field), and ocular hypertensives (normal disc, no

48 thus presumably the size of, the functional visual field, and (2) how the pre-attentive guidance mec

49 diagnosis, visual acuity, fundus appearance, visual field, and full-field electroretinography, fundus

50 nd ocular hypertensives (normal disc, normal visual field, and intraocular pressure >22 mmHg).

51 gement requires information from imaging and visual fields, and efforts have been made to combine inf

52 utation; retinal function as assessed by VA, visual fields, and electroretinography results; and reti

53 ERG) can provide objective corroboration for visual fields, and fundus autofluorescence (FAF) can sho

54 How best should OCT be used alongside visual fields, and how often should OCT be performed?

55 OP, glaucoma medical therapy, visual acuity, visual fields, and surgical complications.

56 y threshold for white, red, and blue colors; visual field; and pupillary light reflex.

57 The size of the functional visual field appears to increase according to the level

58 s, VTOT increased in 5 patients, and kinetic visual field area improved in 3 patients.

59 The association for the central inferior visual field area was statistically significantly strong

60 eld hill of vision (VTOT), kinetic perimetry visual field area, and responses to a quality-of-life qu

61 ribution of preparatory attention across the visual field; asymmetry in the peak latency of the early

62 tegy relative to a scheme that processes the visual field at high spatial resolution?

63 revealed that MAK patients had better VA and visual fields at relatively older ages in comparison wit

64 is difficult, or indeed in rapid testing of visual fields at the bedside to screen for post-operativ

65 ptical coherence tomography (OCT), automated visual field (AVF), and angiograms.

66 curvature-preferring domains show a central visual field bias whereas place- and rectilinear-preferr

67 ar-preferring domains show a more peripheral visual field bias.

68 LR to probes presented within the stimulated visual field, but suppressed the PLR to probes at nonove

69 To define age-related changes in the visual field by comparing 'standard' central and unique

70 -month intervals, and evaluation of rates of visual field change was performed using mean sensitivity

71 The most common visual field changes included enlargement and expansion

72 sensitivity (CS), and the binocular driving visual field constructed from combining the monocular vi

73 rmance specifically for items encoded in the visual field contralateral to the site of stimulation.

74 ivity at 3 months postlesion, independent of visual field coordinates.

75 Central visual field damage seen on the 10-2 test is often misse

76 rised by cupping of the optic nerve head and visual-field damage.

77 ity then were used to reconstruct real-world visual field data by computer simulation to evaluate the

78 The peripheral visual field declined substantially from the 4th decade

79 The discrepancy between the visual field defect and the optic nerve head morphology,

80 There was no correlation between visual field defect and TLCPD, IOP, or ICP and in any bo

81 n acute unilateral decrease in vision, (2) a visual field defect consistent with NAION, (3) a relativ

82 The visual field defect demonstrated bilateral enlarged blin

83 Associations between global visual field defects and predictors were examined.

84 To investigate the prevalence of visual field defects in glaucomatous eyes, glaucoma susp

85 of the central and peripheral EVC following visual field defects specifically affecting central or p

86 visual acuity (BCVA), fundus abnormalities, visual field defects, ffERG changes, and presence of ant

87 effects cause headache, hypopituitarism, and visual field defects.

88 rms of glaucoma are painless and symptomatic visual-field defects occur late.

89 correlated with the extent of the peripheral visual field deficit in this cohort.

90 athreshold perimetry was able to detect most visual field deficits with moderate (MD of -6 to -12 dB)

91 bat blast exposure and reveals high rates of visual field deficits, indicating that blast forces may

92 ements of visual function (visual acuity and visual field), demographics, and disease characteristics

93 e relationship between baseline and rates of visual field deterioration and the probability of vision

94 next-generation endoscopes that will improve visual field, display unprecedented antibacterial and an

95 To evaluate the accuracy and efficiency of Visual Fields Easy (VFE), a free iPad app, for performin

96 DISCUSSION: The Visual Fields Easy test procedure is a portable, fast, e

97 The average time to perform the Visual Fields Easy test was 3 minutes, 18 seconds (stand

98 ve clinical examination, visual acuity (VA), visual fields, electroretinography, color vision testing

99 vision (Ishihara pseudoisochromatic plates), visual field examination, optical coherence tomography (

100 st glaucoma, progression was detected in the visual field first in 163 eyes (52%) and in the optic di

101 rmal fields, progression was detected in the visual field first in 28 eyes (15%) and in the optic dis

102 We simulated series (n = 100 000) of visual fields for patients with stable glaucoma and pati

103 n with varying spatial resolution across the visual field (foveated vision) and deploy eye movements

104 model introduces variation of the functional visual field (FVF) for explaining visual search behavior

105 The Functional Visual Field (FVF) offers explanatory power.

106 ation, fundus retinography, Goldmann kinetic visual field (GVF), and full-field electroretinogram (ff

107 sitivity in the central inferior area of the visual field had the strongest association with longitud

108 Methods to examine the visual field have been refined from early kinetic perime

109 t signal the orientation of edges within the visual field have been widely studied in primary visual

110 Comparison was made of visual acuity, visual field height, global RNFL thickness, and prVEP am

111 (BCVA), static perimetry central 30 degrees visual field hill of vision (V30) and total visual field

112 visual field hill of vision (V30) and total visual field hill of vision (VTOT), kinetic perimetry vi

113 imum angle of resolution [logMAR]), Humphrey Visual Field (HVF) mean deviation (MD), and retinal nerv

114 erve head and retinal nerve fiber layer, and visual field in a dark room with 1 eye patched) were col

115 Impairment in the driving visual field in drivers with glaucoma seems to have an i

116 Visual sensitivity varies across the visual field in several characteristic ways.

117 correlated with NFL thickness (P < .001) and visual field index (P < .001).

118 (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), and visual field index (VFI).

119 and an additional 36% had an abnormal global visual field index.

120 Test-retest stability of global visual field indices was assessed for tests with these c

121 the information from a certain region of the visual field is conveyed to neurons situated close toget

122 that contrast V1.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Our visual field is thought to be represented faithfully by

123 ating information across a large area of the visual field, is not well understood.

124 al retina; 30 degrees and 12 degrees central visual fields; Lanthony 15-hue color vision test; automa

125 orrected visual acuity of 20/60 or worse, or visual field less than 20 degrees in any meridian, or bo

126 For each 24-2 visual field location, the corresponding sectoral peripa

127 were shown at typical (rather than reversed) visual field locations, they were discriminated better b

128 presented at typical, rather than reversed, visual field locations.

129 presented at typical, rather than reversed, visual field locations.

130 The sensitivity for identifying rapid visual field loss (-2 decibels [dB]/year loss of MD).

131 ient following bilateral NAION, and also for visual field loss (R = 0.445, P < 0.001) in the two eyes

132 d to detect progression for various rates of visual field loss and different frequencies of testing.

133 d-effect relationship exists between rate of visual field loss and self-reported history of falls.

134 Rates of visual field loss as estimated by integrated binocular M

135 Among fellow eyes without visual field loss at baseline, progression was detected

136 case report of an adolescent boy with acute visual field loss despite a normal fundus examination pe

137 tation was with nyctalopia in childhood with visual field loss documented later at a mean (SD) age of

138 ing the implant showed significantly greater visual field loss from baseline than either explanted ey

139 ss from the optic nerve and retinal disease, visual field loss from retrochiasmal visual pathway dama

140 The current assessment of visual field loss in diseases such as glaucoma is affect

141 toring improves the early detection of rapid visual field loss in glaucoma and how any benefits might

142 l NAION only 15% of visual acuity and 20% of visual field loss in the secondly affected eye can be ex

143 )) of 0.149 for visual acuity, and 0.198 for visual field loss indicates that for any given individua

144 31st 2016 reporting on visual acuity and/or visual field loss of both affected eyes, measured either

145 rized by irreversible optic nerve damage and visual field loss that leads to visual impairment and bl

146 gnificant progression for different rates of visual field loss using standard automated perimetry (SA

147 60 months and continuing through 96 months, visual field loss was comparable among sham-treated eyes

148 History of fast visual field loss was significantly associated with fall

149 Rates of visual field loss were assessed by SAP.

150 ences of visual acuity 0.008, P = 0.890; and visual field loss, -0.019, P = 0.819).

151 Of the 114 eyes with 10-2 visual field loss, 93 (82%) demonstrated abnormal points

152 Baseline disease severity, rate of visual field loss, and duration of follow-up were invest

153 If multispot lasers cause less visual field loss, continuing to perform PRP may be just

154 rders associated with progressive peripheral visual field loss.

155 as found to be associated with the extent of visual field loss.

156 articularly those eyes with past progressive visual field loss.

157 e self-reported number of falls and rates of visual field loss.

158 rocedure for detecting moderate and advanced visual field loss.

159 These data demonstrate the prevalence of visual field maps throughout the primate visual system,

160 We confirm the presence of visual field maps within and around the lower bank of th

161 es have demonstrated the presence of several visual field maps within the lateral IT.

162 tion of the temporal area toward the frontal visual field may facilitate grazing, while resolution of

163 Further change to visual fields may have occurred with longer follow-up.

164 with medicated IOP >/=20 and </=35 mm Hg and visual field mean deviation </=-3 dB.

165 asure was change from month 6 to month 12 in visual field mean deviation (MD) with secondary measures

166 Mixed-effects linear models were tested with visual field mean deviation as a dependent variable and

167 The median (IQR) 24-2 visual field mean deviation was -7.6 (-11.1 to -3.0).

168 The median age, visual field mean deviation, and follow-up period of the

169 ormalities: early glaucoma (GON and abnormal visual field, mean deviation >-6 decibels [dB]), glaucom

170 ing 'standard' central and unique peripheral visual field measurements in healthy volunteers.

171 on clinical characteristics, visual acuity, visual field measurements, retinal imaging, and electrop

172 five retrospective studies were included in visual field meta-analysis.

173 ary impact of adoption of a home-based daily visual-field monitoring system among eligible Medicare p

174 To evaluate a home-based daily visual-field monitoring system using simulation methods

175 e of 54 years and mean deviation (MD) in the visual field of -5 dB and 20 healthy controls (70% women

176 UV and green luminance in any region of the visual field of an awake, head-fixed mouse.

177 mework where only the size of the functional visual field of fixations can vary is hardly able to exp

178 eld constructed from combining the monocular visual fields of each eye.

179 e salience (the sudden appearance within the visual field) of a stimulus at any one location, and thu

180 underwent visual acuity, binocular function, visual field, optical coherence tomography (OCT) of the

181 Clinical testing included visual acuity, visual fields, optical coherence tomography, pattern ele

182 tokines, the mean deviation on 24-2 Humphrey visual fields, or the duration of vision loss.

183 between quality-of-life scores and residual visual field (P < .0001).

184 Stimuli were briefly presented on the visual-field periphery to experimental participants whos

185 association between betaPPA progression and visual field progression (beta = 0.020; 95% CI, -0.465 t

186 Evaluation of visual field progression and optic disc progression duri

187 Visual field progression and rate of VF loss.

188 Landmark clinical trials have used various visual field progression criteria as end points with var

189 association between betaPPA progression and visual field progression did not differ significantly be

190 on of betaPPA was not associated with faster visual field progression in either racial group.

191 iation between baseline betaPPA and rates of visual field progression in eyes with GON.

192 nction may be important in the assessment of visual field progression in the context of glaucoma.

193 with a CLS were associated with the rate of visual field progression in treated glaucomatous eyes.

194 Detecting rapid visual field progression may be improved using a home-mo

195 n the presence and progression of betaPPA vs visual field progression of glaucoma differs between the

196 Visual field progression was assessed by PROGRESSOR soft

197 Faster visual field progression was associated with the occurre

198 association between betaPPA at baseline and visual field progression was not significantly different

199 Visual field progression was observed in 63 of 398 eyes

200 ipheral temporal-inferior and nasal-inferior visual field regions should be good targets for future l

201 from the 4th decade onward while the central visual field remained quite stable.

202 While the central visual field remained relatively well preserved during a

203 appearing most often in the upper and lower visual field, respectively.

204 , conspecifics) in the lateral and posterior visual fields, respectively.

205 the prevalence of abnormal 24-2 versus 10-2 visual field results based on cluster criteria in each d

206 dent choroidal infarction that explained the visual field scotoma and the retinal nerve fibre layer d

207 rmined the mathematical relationship between visual field sensitivity and ganglion cell number are re

208 on relationship using fundus photography and visual field sensitivity are examined.

209 The primary endpoint (change in visual field sensitivity at 12 months) had been reported

210 Participants with depressed visual field sensitivity reported lower visual quality o

211 Initially, histologic studies that link visual field sensitivity to retinal ganglion cell count

212 s no evidence of efficacy for visual acuity, visual field sensitivity, or OCT measures of retinal str

213 Eye and Visual Function) of the SHPC-18 with visual field severity and 25-item National Eye Institute

214 radients of polar angle of the contralateral visual field share a confluent fovea.

215 [4, 6, 7], a large trinocular fronto-dorsal visual field shared by all ocelli.

216 However, visual acuity declined to 20/60, visual field showed severe progressive deterioration wit

217 Patients were excluded if their sequential visual fields showed an improvement in MD or if they had

218 Visual fields showed sensitivity losses centrally associ

219 m uses these retinotopic maps to compute the visual field sign and coverage, and automatically constr

220 ar pressure (IOP), number of medications and visual field status.

221 ate visual-evoked potentials associated with visual field stimulation.

222 e electrical brain responses associated with visual field stimulation.

223 o distinct visual fields-a focused monocular visual field suitable for detecting features elevated ab

224 resentation of visual motion from across the visual field, supplied by motion processing neurons.

225 Stimuli in the contralateral visual field suppressed responses to ipsilateral stimuli

226 mely investigations, including an iPad-based visual field test (Melbourne Rapid Field, (MRF)) conduct

227 rticipants who passed the Esterman binocular visual field test for driving in the United Kingdom (at

228 41 of 43 patients (95%) passed the Esterman visual field test for driving; after completion of laser

229 ts within the central 10 degrees of the 24-2 visual field test.

230 48+/-0.13; P = 0.006), and mean deviation on visual field testing (-10.0+/-10.3 vs. -1.2+/-1.2; P < 0

231 plemented to improve patient experience with visual field testing and to increase reliability.

232 graphy, provide an alternative to subjective visual field testing but are not yet ready for widesprea

233 Visual field testing has played an essential role in the

234 layer (GCL) thickness, macular thickness and visual field testing in migraine patients without aura.

235 patients in hospital where access to formal visual field testing is difficult, or indeed in rapid te

236 he assessment of a pituitary mass, objective visual field testing represents a valuable means of eval

237 Their mean deviation (SD) from visual field testing was -5.5 (4.3) dB.

238 Visual field testing will continue to have an important

239 erwent SD-OCT of the optic nerve head (ONH), visual field testing, and clinical examination.

240 , best-corrected VA, digital fundus imaging, visual field testing, and measurement of intraocular pre

241 urement, Frequency Doubling Technology (FDT) visual field testing, autorefraction, A-scan biometry an

242 ed with measures of retinal sensitivity from visual field testing.

243 evaluated using IOP measurements and data on visual field testing/a diagnosis of glaucoma (if availab

244 -lamp and optic nerve examination; automated visual field testing; and fundus color photography.

245 Then, color fundus photographs and Humphrey Visual Field tests (HVF) of these eyes were mixed with t

246 eyes of the 107 participants underwent 10-2 visual field tests and SD-OCT scans, and all participant

247 New devices may allow patients to complete visual field tests at home, which could relieve patients

248 ic Depression Scale (GDS) questionnaires and visual field tests obtained over a mean follow-up time o

249 Participants with 5 or more visual field tests over a 2- to 5-year period were inclu

250 e LPFC of motion information from across the visual field, these "comparison effects" required for th

251 e vertical extent of features in the lateral visual field to assess distances to the side, and vertic

252 may enhance visual sampling in the posterior visual field to compensate for limited neck mobility as

253 nique advantage in differential detection of visual field uniformity and contrast.

254 ments were made across the central 16-degree visual field using letter-recognition tasks.

255 home monitor the sensitivity of the central visual field using portable devices.

256 We performed screening visual fields using a calibrated iPad 2 with the VFE app

257 nitive decline was associated with increased visual field variability during follow-up.

258 between global neurocognitive impairment and visual field variability in patients diagnosed as having

259 Visual field variability may impair detection of glaucom

260 ssociation between change in MoCA scores and visual field variability over time.

261 Visual field variability was estimated by the SD of the

262 he association between cognitive decline and visual field variability, adjusting for potentially conf

263 he association between cognitive changes and visual field variability.

264 Association between cognitive decline and visual field variability.

265 Monocular visual field (VF) and visual acuity (VA) tests were perf

266 a, and to determine whether those with worse visual field (VF) damage have fewer home hazards.

267 etinal ganglion cells and associated central visual field (VF) defects in glaucoma, even in early sta

268 in eyes with glaucoma with single-hemifield visual field (VF) defects may provide insight into the p

269 Technology perimetry was used to assess for visual field (VF) defects.

270 cteristics of drusen in eyes with or without visual field (VF) defects.

271 traocular pressure (IOP; >/= or <22 mmHg) or visual field (VF) loss pattern at diagnosis (peripheral

272 ar pressure (IOP) (>/=22 or <22 mm Hg) or by visual field (VF) loss pattern at diagnosis (peripheral

273 Age, sex, intraocular pressure, visual field (VF) mean deviation (MD), number of antigla

274 To evaluate visual field (VF) progression and rate of glaucomatous V

275 ation losses (FL), and test duration (TD) on visual field (VF) reliability at different stages of gla

276 perimetry (SAP) affect the global indices of visual field (VF) results in nonglaucomatous eyes.

277 ain optical coherence tomography (SDOCT) and visual field (VF) results were recorded.

278 , ganglion cell complex (GCC) thickness, and visual field (VF) sensitivity.

279 raobserver and interobserver agreement using visual field (VF) testing and optical coherence tomograp

280 ients with newly diagnosed OAG who underwent visual field (VF) testing, fundus photography (FP), othe

281 using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and visual field (VF).

282 tomography imaging, 24-2 standard achromatic visual fields (VF), and CS measurement on the same day w

283 ern deviation (PD) values of 11,449 reliable visual fields (VFs) that are defined as clinically unaff

284 -field electroretinography (ffERG), Goldmann visual fields (VFs), and spectral-domain optical coheren

285 The residual seeing visual field was constricted in all cases when compared

286 An integrated binocular visual field was estimated from the monocular SAP tests,

287 cores and change in different regions of the visual field was investigated with a joint multivariable

288 nsitivity, a profound loss of the peripheral visual field was observed beginning in the fifth decade

289 the stimulus was unseen and location in the visual field was peripheral.

290 The height of the visual field was smaller in the eye contralateral to the

291 Worse initial visual acuity and visual fields were associated with lower initial NEI-VFQ

292 obe) was briefly presented in the peripheral visual field, which could either match or mismatch the s

293 ating stimuli presented in the left or right visual field while activity patterns in their visual cor

294 et reports vary idiosyncratically across the visual field with a strong correlation across tasks for

295 icities rather than uniformly over the whole visual field, with a transiently enhanced contribution f

296 dominated responses from the upper to lower visual fields, with a smaller difference across azimuth.

297 tially between observers and also across the visual field within the same observer.

298 the visual span (an uncrowded window in the visual field within which letters can be recognizable re

299 A test-retest cohort contained 5 reliable visual fields, within a short interval, from 45 eyes of

300 rain were greater in glaucoma eyes with past visual field worsening (P = .006 by multivariable linear