Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:605920rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0042789lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:605920lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0179038lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:605920lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0035036lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:605920lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0079809lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:issue10lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:dateCreated1978-4-17lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:abstractTextFour subjective measures of the refractive error of 42 eyes (21 patients) were obtained by 2 examiners, one using a Humphrey Vision Analyzer TM and the other using a conventional refractor. Each examiner made 2 separate measures of each subject's refractive error, one without and one with an added cylindrical lens chosen at random from a predetermined set of powers and axes. The order of using the instruments and the added lenses was mixed. Measures of the refractive errors differed with the 2 instruments by approximately the same amount on average as did duplicate measures with either instrument. Refractive-error measures obtained with the 2 instruments are about as valid as they are repeatable.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:monthOctlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:issn0093-7002lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:authorpubmed-author:FlomM CMClld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:authorpubmed-author:KratzL DLDlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:volume54lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:pagination653-9lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:dateRevised2006-11-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:605920-H...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:605920-A...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:605920-A...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:605920-O...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:605920-F...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:605920-M...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:605920-A...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:605920-R...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:605920-R...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:605920-M...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:year1977lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:articleTitleThe Humphrey Vision Analyzer tm: reliability and validity of refractive-error measures.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:605920pubmed:publicationTypeComparative Studylld:pubmed