Efficiency of Rarebit perimetry in the evaluation of homonymous hemianopia in stroke patients

British Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 91, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 1065-1069

  Gedik, Sansal ^a   Akman, Ahmet ^a   Akova, Yonca A ^a  

^a BASKENT UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HOMONYMOUS HEMIANOPIA; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OCCIPITAL LOBE; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STROKE PATIENT; VISION TEST; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL FIELD DEFECT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HEMIANOPSIA; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERIMETRY; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 34547142273     PISSN: 00071161     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2006.112607     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Zhang X, Kedar S, Lynn MJ, et al. Homonymous hemianopia in stroke. J Neuroophthalmol 2006;26:180-3.
2. Zhang X, Kedar S, Lynn MJ, et al. Homonymous hemianopias: clinical-anatomic correlations in 904 cases. Neurology 2006;66:906-10.
3. Wong AM, Sharpe JA. A comparison of tangent screen, goldmann, and humphrey perimetry in the detection and localization of occipital lesions. Ophthalmology 2000;107:527-44.
4. Frisen L. New, sensitive window on abnormal spatial vision: rarebit probing. Vision Res 2002;42:1931-9.
5. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J. A package for the statistical analysis of computerized fields. In: Greve EL, Heijl A, eds. Seventh International Visual Field Symposium, Amsterdam 1986. Dordrecht: Nijhoff/Dr Junk, 1987:153-68.
6. Choplin NT, Edwards RP. Basic principles of visual field interpretation. In: Choplin NT, Edwards RP, eds. Visual field testing with the Humphrey field analyzer. Thorofare, NJ, 1999:77-113.
7. McFadzean R, Brosnahan D, Hadley D, et al. Representation of the visual field in the occipital striate cortex. Br J Ophthalmol 1994;78:185-90.
8. Brusini P, Salvetat ML, Parisi L, et al. Probing glaucoma visual damage by rarebit perimetry. Br J Ophthalmol 2005;89:180-4.
9. Frisen L. Vigabatrin-associated loss of vision: rarebit perimetry illuminates the dose-damage relationship. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2004;82:54-8.
10. Martin L. Rarebit and frequency-doubling technology perimetry in children and young adults. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2005;83:670-7.
11. Malmer L, Martin L. Microdot test of foveal function. A comparison with visual acuity at high and low contrast. Ophthal Physiol Optics 2005;25:81-6.
12. Martin L, Wanger P. New perimetric techniques: a comparison between rarebit and frequency doubling technology perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma 2004;13:268-72.