BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Cited by in F6Publishing
For: Glen FC, Baker H, Crabb DP. A qualitative investigation into patients' views on visual field testing for glaucoma monitoring. BMJ Open 2014;4:e003996. [PMID: 24413347 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003996] [Cited by in Crossref: 50] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 50] [Article Influence: 7.1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
Number Citing Articles
1 Jones PR, Tigchelaar I, Demaria G, Wilson I, Bi W, Taylor DJ, Crabb DP. Refinement and preliminary evaluation of two tablet-based tests of real-world visual function. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2020;40:35-46. [PMID: 31879994 DOI: 10.1111/opo.12658] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
2 Bowen M, Zutshi H, Cordiner M, Crutch S, Shakespeare T. Qualitative, exploratory pilot study to investigate how people living with posterior cortical atrophy, their carers and clinicians experience tests used to assess vision. BMJ Open 2019;9:e020905. [PMID: 30898793 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020905] [Reference Citation Analysis]
3 Peterson KM, Huisingh CE, Girkin C, Owsley C, Rhodes LA. Patient satisfaction with care in an urban tertiary referral academic glaucoma clinic in the US. Patient Prefer Adherence 2018;12:775-81. [PMID: 29785092 DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S162439] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
4 Murray IC, Perperidis A, Cameron LA, McTrusty AD, Brash HM, Tatham AJ, Agarwal PK, Fleck BW, Minns RA. Comparison of Saccadic Vector Optokinetic Perimetry and Standard Automated Perimetry in Glaucoma. Part I: Threshold Values and Repeatability. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2017;6:3. [PMID: 28900576 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.6.5.3] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
5 Nesaratnam N, Thomas PBM, Kirollos R, Vingrys AJ, Kong GYX, Martin KR. Tablets at the bedside - iPad-based visual field test used in the diagnosis of Intrasellar Haemangiopericytoma: a case report. BMC Ophthalmol 2017;17:53. [PMID: 28438131 DOI: 10.1186/s12886-017-0445-z] [Cited by in Crossref: 14] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
6 Tatham AJ, McClean P, Murray IC, McTrusty AD, Cameron LA, Perperidis A, Brash HM, Fleck BW, Minns RA. Development of an Age-corrected Normative Database for Saccadic Vector Optokinetic Perimetry (SVOP). J Glaucoma 2020;29:1106-14. [PMID: 33264163 DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001651] [Reference Citation Analysis]
7 Boodhna T, Crabb DP. Disease severity in newly diagnosed glaucoma patients with visual field loss: trends from more than a decade of data. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2015;35:225-30. [PMID: 25545852 DOI: 10.1111/opo.12187] [Cited by in Crossref: 23] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 21] [Article Influence: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
8 Muthusamy V, Turpin A, Nguyen BN, Denniss J, McKendrick AM. Patients' Views of Visual Field Testing and Priorities for Research Development and Translation into Practice. Ophthalmol Glaucoma 2021:S2589-4196(21)00238-6. [PMID: 34655797 DOI: 10.1016/j.ogla.2021.10.003] [Reference Citation Analysis]
9 Asfaw DS, Jones PR, Edwards LA, Smith ND, Crabb DP. Using eye movements to detect visual field loss: a pragmatic assessment using simulated scotoma. Sci Rep 2020;10:9782. [PMID: 32555198 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-66196-2] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
10 Han HK, Jones PR. Plug and play perimetry: Evaluating the use of a self-calibrating digital display for screen-based threshold perimetry. Displays 2019;60:30-8. [DOI: 10.1016/j.displa.2019.08.006] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
11 Jones PR, Demaria G, Tigchelaar I, Asfaw DS, Edgar DF, Campbell P, Callaghan T, Crabb DP. The Human Touch: Using a Webcam to Autonomously Monitor Compliance During Visual Field Assessments. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2020;9:31. [PMID: 32855877 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.9.8.31] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
12 Mendieta N, Suárez J, Barriga N, Herrero R, Barrios B, Guarro M. How Do Patients Feel About Visual Field Testing? Analysis of Subjective Perception of Standard Automated Perimetry. Semin Ophthalmol 2021;36:35-40. [PMID: 33587671 DOI: 10.1080/08820538.2021.1884270] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
13 Boodhna T, Crabb DP. More frequent, more costly? Health economic modelling aspects of monitoring glaucoma patients in England. BMC Health Serv Res 2016;16:611. [PMID: 27770792 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-016-1849-9] [Cited by in Crossref: 22] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 24] [Article Influence: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
14 Tatham AJ, Murray IC, McTrusty AD, Cameron LA, Perperidis A, Brash HM, Fleck BW, Minns RA. A case control study examining the feasibility of using eye tracking perimetry to differentiate patients with glaucoma from healthy controls. Sci Rep 2021;11:839. [PMID: 33436922 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-80401-2] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
15 Kotecha A, Turner S, Vasilakis C, Utley M, Fulop N, Azuara-Blanco A, Foster PJ. Improving care and increasing efficiency-challenges in the care of chronic eye diseases. Eye (Lond) 2014;28:779-83. [PMID: 25008575 DOI: 10.1038/eye.2014.135] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
16 Najjar RP, Sharma S, Atalay E, Rukmini AV, Sun C, Lock JZ, Baskaran M, Perera SA, Husain R, Lamoureux E, Gooley JJ, Aung T, Milea D. Pupillary Responses to Full-Field Chromatic Stimuli Are Reduced in Patients with Early-Stage Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma. Ophthalmology 2018;125:1362-71. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.02.024] [Cited by in Crossref: 23] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 19] [Article Influence: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
17 Foo VHX, Tan SEM, Chen DZ, Perera SA, Sabayanagam C, Fenwick EK, Wong TT, Lamoureux EL. Areas and factors associated with patients' dissatisfaction with glaucoma care. Clin Ophthalmol 2017;11:1849-57. [PMID: 29075097 DOI: 10.2147/OPTH.S138668] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
18 Lavanya R, Riyazuddin M, Dasari S, Puttaiah NK, Venugopal JP, Pradhan ZS, Devi S, Sreenivasaiah S, Ganeshrao SB, Rao HL. A Comparison of the Visual Field Parameters of SITA Faster and SITA Standard Strategies in Glaucoma. Journal of Glaucoma 2020;29:783-8. [DOI: 10.1097/ijg.0000000000001551] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Article Influence: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
19 Camp AS, Weinreb RN. Will Perimetry Be Performed to Monitor Glaucoma in 2025? Ophthalmology 2017;124:S71-5. [PMID: 28865878 DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2017.04.009] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
20 Jones L, Callaghan T, Campbell P, Jones PR, Taylor DJ, Asfaw DS, Edgar DF, Crabb DP. Acceptability of a home-based visual field test (Eyecatcher) for glaucoma home monitoring: a qualitative study of patients' views and experiences. BMJ Open 2021;11:e043130. [PMID: 33820785 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043130] [Reference Citation Analysis]
21 Mazumdar D, Pel JJM, Kadavath Meethal NS, Asokan R, Panday M, Steen JVD, George R. Visual Field Plots: A Comparison Study Between Standard Automated Perimetry and Eye Movement Perimetry. J Glaucoma 2020;29:351-61. [PMID: 32108671 DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001477] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
22 Helm JE, Lavieri MS, Van Oyen MP, Stein JD, Musch DC. Dynamic Forecasting and Control Algorithms of Glaucoma Progression for Clinician Decision Support. Operations Research 2015;63:979-99. [DOI: 10.1287/opre.2015.1405] [Cited by in Crossref: 23] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
23 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. A Comparison between the Compass Fundus Perimeter and the Humphrey Field Analyzer. Ophthalmology 2019;126:242-51. [PMID: 30114416 DOI: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2018.08.010] [Cited by in Crossref: 17] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14] [Article Influence: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
24 Crabb DP, Smith ND, Zhu H. What's on TV? Detecting age-related neurodegenerative eye disease using eye movement scanpaths. Front Aging Neurosci 2014;6:312. [PMID: 25429267 DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00312] [Cited by in Crossref: 31] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 21] [Article Influence: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
25 Ly A, Phu J, Katalinic P, Kalloniatis M. An evidence-based approach to the routine use of optical coherence tomography. Clin Exp Optom 2019;102:242-59. [PMID: 30560558 DOI: 10.1111/cxo.12847] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
26 McKendrick AM, Zeman A, Liu P, Aktepe D, Aden I, Bhagat D, Do K, Nguyen HD, Turpin A. Robot Assistants for Perimetry: A Study of Patient Experience and Performance. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2019;8:59. [PMID: 31293814 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.8.3.59] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
27 Boodhna T, Saunders LJ, Crabb DP. Are rates of vision loss in patients in English glaucoma clinics slowing down over time? Trends from a decade of data. Eye (Lond) 2015;29:1613-9. [PMID: 26315701 DOI: 10.1038/eye.2015.161] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
28 Latham K, Mann DL, Dolan R, Myint J, Timmis MA, Ryu D, Frisson S, Allen PM. Do visual fields need to be considered in classification criteria within visually impaired shooting? J Sports Sci 2021;39:150-8. [PMID: 33861160 DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2021.1911425] [Reference Citation Analysis]
29 Kelly SR, Bryan SR, Crabb DP. Does eye examination order for standard automated perimetry matter? Acta Ophthalmol 2019;97:e833-8. [PMID: 30801992 DOI: 10.1111/aos.14069] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
30 Chew SSL, Kerr NM, Wong ABC, Craig JP, Chou C, Danesh-meyer HV. Anxiety in visual field testing. Br J Ophthalmol 2016;100:1128-33. [DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307110] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
31 Pradhan ZS, Sircar T, Agrawal H, Rao HL, Bopardikar A, Devi S, Tiwari VN. Comparison of the Performance of a Novel, Smartphone-based, Head-mounted Perimeter (GearVision) With the Humphrey Field Analyzer. J Glaucoma 2021;30:e146-52. [PMID: 33596021 DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001797] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
32 Meethal NSK, Pel JJM, Mazumdar D, Asokan R, Panday M, van der Steen J, George R. Eye Movement Perimetry and Frequency Doubling Perimetry: clinical performance and patient preference during glaucoma screening. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2019;257:1277-87. [PMID: 30944987 DOI: 10.1007/s00417-019-04311-4] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
33 [DOI: 10.1101/2020.05.28.20115725] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
34 Taylor DJ, Jones L, Binns AM, Crabb DP. 'You've got dry macular degeneration, end of story': a qualitative study into the experience of living with non-neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Eye (Lond) 2020;34:461-73. [PMID: 31118490 DOI: 10.1038/s41433-019-0445-8] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
35 Jones PR, Smith ND, Bi W, Crabb DP. Portable Perimetry Using Eye-Tracking on a Tablet Computer-A Feasibility Assessment. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2019;8:17. [PMID: 30740267 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.8.1.17] [Cited by in Crossref: 27] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 20] [Article Influence: 13.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
36 Razeghinejad R, Gonzalez-Garcia A, Myers JS, Katz LJ. Preliminary Report on a Novel Virtual Reality Perimeter Compared With Standard Automated Perimetry. J Glaucoma 2021;30:17-23. [PMID: 32941320 DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001670] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
37 Montesano G, Rossetti LM, Allegrini D, Romano MR, Crabb DP. Improving Visual Field Examination of the Macula Using Structural Information. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2018;7:36. [PMID: 30619656 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.7.6.36] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9] [Article Influence: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
38 Jones PR. An Open-source Static Threshold Perimetry Test Using Remote Eye-tracking (Eyecatcher): Description, Validation, and Preliminary Normative Data. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2020;9:18. [PMID: 32855865 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.9.8.18] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
39 Murray IC, Cameron LA, McTrusty AD, Perperidis A, Brash HM, Fleck BW, Minns RA. Feasibility, Accuracy, and Repeatability of Suprathreshold Saccadic Vector Optokinetic Perimetry. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2016;5:15. [PMID: 27617181 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.5.4.15] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
40 Montesano G, Quigley HA, Crabb DP. Improving the Power of Glaucoma Neuroprotection Trials Using Existing Visual Field Data. Am J Ophthalmol 2021;229:127-36. [PMID: 33905747 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2021.04.008] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
41 McTrusty AD, Cameron LA, Perperidis A, Brash HM, Tatham AJ, Agarwal PK, Murray IC, Fleck BW, Minns RA. Comparison of Threshold Saccadic Vector Optokinetic Perimetry (SVOP) and Standard Automated Perimetry (SAP) in Glaucoma. Part II: Patterns of Visual Field Loss and Acceptability. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2017;6:4. [PMID: 28900577 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.6.5.4] [Cited by in Crossref: 19] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 16] [Article Influence: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
42 Kotecha A, Bonstein K, Cable R, Cammack J, Clipston J, Foster P. Qualitative investigation of patients' experience of a glaucoma virtual clinic in a specialist ophthalmic hospital in London, UK. BMJ Open 2015;5:e009463. [PMID: 26671959 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009463] [Cited by in Crossref: 25] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 23] [Article Influence: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
43 Dean S, Mathers JM, Calvert M, Kyte DG, Conroy D, Folkard A, Southworth S, Murray PI, Denniston AK. "The patient is speaking": discovering the patient voice in ophthalmology. Br J Ophthalmol 2017;101:700-8. [PMID: 28455280 DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-309955] [Cited by in Crossref: 31] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 28] [Article Influence: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
44 Stagg BC, Granger A, Guetterman TC, Hess R, Lee PP. The Burden of Caring for and Treating Glaucoma: The Patient Perspective. Ophthalmol Glaucoma 2021:S2589-4196(21)00110-1. [PMID: 33984555 DOI: 10.1016/j.ogla.2021.04.011] [Reference Citation Analysis]
45 Jones PR, Campbell P, Callaghan T, Jones L, Asfaw DS, Edgar DF, Crabb DP. Glaucoma Home Monitoring Using a Tablet-Based Visual Field Test (Eyecatcher): An Assessment of Accuracy and Adherence Over 6 Months. Am J Ophthalmol 2021;223:42-52. [PMID: 32882222 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2020.08.039] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
46 Tatham AJ, Murray IC, McTrusty AD, Cameron LA, Perperidis A, Brash HM, Fleck BW, Minns RA. Speed and accuracy of saccades in patients with glaucoma evaluated using an eye tracking perimeter. BMC Ophthalmol 2020;20:259. [PMID: 32605609 DOI: 10.1186/s12886-020-01528-4] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
47 Pfau M, Jolly JK, Wu Z, Denniss J, Lad EM, Guymer RH, Fleckenstein M, Holz FG, Schmitz-Valckenberg S. Fundus-controlled perimetry (microperimetry): Application as outcome measure in clinical trials. Prog Retin Eye Res 2021;82:100907. [PMID: 33022378 DOI: 10.1016/j.preteyeres.2020.100907] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
48 Crabb DP. A view on glaucoma--are we seeing it clearly? Eye (Lond) 2016;30:304-13. [PMID: 26611846 DOI: 10.1038/eye.2015.244] [Cited by in Crossref: 29] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 26] [Article Influence: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
49 Glen FC, Crabb DP. Living with glaucoma: a qualitative study of functional implications and patients' coping behaviours. BMC Ophthalmol 2015;15:128. [PMID: 26445483 DOI: 10.1186/s12886-015-0119-7] [Cited by in Crossref: 35] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 32] [Article Influence: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
50 Soans RS, Renken RJ, John J, Bhongade A, Raj D, Saxena R, Tandon R, Gandhi TK, Cornelissen FW. Patients Prefer a Virtual Reality Approach Over a Similarly Performing Screen-Based Approach for Continuous Oculomotor-Based Screening of Glaucomatous and Neuro-Ophthalmological Visual Field Defects. Front Neurosci 2021;15:745355. [PMID: 34690682 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2021.745355] [Reference Citation Analysis]