Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Purpose: A new version of frequency doubling perimetry was compared to a former version in patients with glaucoma.
Design: Prospective observational study.
Method: Thirty-two patients with glaucoma were examined twice sequentially in one eye with threshold c-20 of frequency doubling perimetry version 2.6. Within 3 months, the same eye was again examined twice sequentially, this time using the new version 3.0. Mean deviation, pattern standard deviation, short-term fluctuation, intraocular pressure at examination, and test duration were compared between versions.
Results: No significant difference was found in mean deviation, pattern standard deviation, intraocular pressure, or short-term fluctuation between versions.
Conclusions: Version 3.0 took less time to perform the threshold test than did version 2.6. Version 3.0 of the frequency doubling perimetry program took less time to perform and showed similar values of visual field indexes when compared with version 2.6.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9394(02)01850-0 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!