Clinical evaluation of SITA: a new family of perimetric testing strategies

To perform a clinical comparison of the Humphrey Full Threshold strategy with its intended replacement, SITA Standard, regarding testing time, reproducibility, and measured threshold sensitivity in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. Thirty-eight healthy volunteers and 80 patients with primary op...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology Vol. 237; no. 1; pp. 29 - 34
Main Authors Shirato, S., Inoue, Rishu, Fukushima, Kazumi, Suzuki, Yasuyuki
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Berlin Springer 01.01.1999
Springer Nature B.V
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0721-832X
1435-702X
DOI10.1007/s004170050190

Cover

Loading…
Abstract To perform a clinical comparison of the Humphrey Full Threshold strategy with its intended replacement, SITA Standard, regarding testing time, reproducibility, and measured threshold sensitivity in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. Thirty-eight healthy volunteers and 80 patients with primary open-angel glaucoma underwent central 30-2 testing with both Full Threshold and SITA strategies using a Humphrey HFA 2 Model 740 perimeter. The testing time, reproducibility, and measured threshold sensitivity of the two strategies were compared. The testing time for measurements with SITA was 56% lower in normal subjects and 45% lower in glaucoma patients than with Full Threshold. Cases having higher mean sensitivity or cases requiring longer testing time for Full Threshold had a greater percentage reduction in testing time for SITA. The test-retest variability studied in normal subjects was lower, but not significantly so, with SITA (2.9%) than with Full Threshold (3.4%). The mean sensitivities of SITA were higher (1 dB) than those of Full Threshold not only in normal subjects but also in glaucoma patients. This higher sensitivity in SITA was found irrespective of the order of the two tests both in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. Analysis by each testing point revealed that the difference was not dependent on the test point position or the sensitivity at the point. SITA has greater patient acceptability than the Full Threshold strategy. However, the difference in sensitivity can be considerable in a serial comparison of one patient's fields tested by Full Threshold and SITA.
AbstractList · Purpose: To perform a clinical comparison of the Humphrey Full Threshold strategy with its intended replacement, SITA Standard, regarding testing time, reproducibility, and measured threshold sensitivity in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. · Methods: Thirty-eight healthy volunteers and 80 patients with primary open-angel glaucoma underwent central 30-2 testing with both Full Threshold and SITA strategies using a Humphrey HFA 2 Model 740 perimeter. The testing time, reproducibility, and measured threshold sensitivity of the two strategies were compared. · Results: The testing time for measurements with SITA was 56% lower in normal subjects and 45% lower in glaucoma patients than with Full Threshold. Cases having higher mean sensitivity or cases requiring longer testing time for Full Threshold had a greater percentage reduction in testing time for SITA. The test-retest variability studied in normal subjects was lower, but not significantly so, with SITA (2.9%) than with Full Threshold (3.4%). The mean sensitivities of SITA were higher (1 dB) than those of Full Threshold not only in normal subjects but also in glaucoma patients. This higher sensitivity in SITA was found irrespective of the order of the two tests both in normal subjects and claucoma patients. Analysis by each testing point revealed that the difference was not dependent on the test point position or the sensitivity at the point. · Conclusion: SITA has greater patient acceptability than the Full Threshold strategy. However, the difference in sensitivity can be considerable in a serial comparison of one patient's fields tested by Full Threshold and SITA.
To perform a clinical comparison of the Humphrey Full Threshold strategy with its intended replacement, SITA Standard, regarding testing time, reproducibility, and measured threshold sensitivity in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. Thirty-eight healthy volunteers and 80 patients with primary open-angel glaucoma underwent central 30-2 testing with both Full Threshold and SITA strategies using a Humphrey HFA 2 Model 740 perimeter. The testing time, reproducibility, and measured threshold sensitivity of the two strategies were compared. The testing time for measurements with SITA was 56% lower in normal subjects and 45% lower in glaucoma patients than with Full Threshold. Cases having higher mean sensitivity or cases requiring longer testing time for Full Threshold had a greater percentage reduction in testing time for SITA. The test-retest variability studied in normal subjects was lower, but not significantly so, with SITA (2.9%) than with Full Threshold (3.4%). The mean sensitivities of SITA were higher (1 dB) than those of Full Threshold not only in normal subjects but also in glaucoma patients. This higher sensitivity in SITA was found irrespective of the order of the two tests both in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. Analysis by each testing point revealed that the difference was not dependent on the test point position or the sensitivity at the point. SITA has greater patient acceptability than the Full Threshold strategy. However, the difference in sensitivity can be considerable in a serial comparison of one patient's fields tested by Full Threshold and SITA.
To perform a clinical comparison of the Humphrey Full Threshold strategy with its intended replacement, SITA Standard, regarding testing time, reproducibility, and measured threshold sensitivity in normal subjects and glaucoma patients.PURPOSETo perform a clinical comparison of the Humphrey Full Threshold strategy with its intended replacement, SITA Standard, regarding testing time, reproducibility, and measured threshold sensitivity in normal subjects and glaucoma patients.Thirty-eight healthy volunteers and 80 patients with primary open-angel glaucoma underwent central 30-2 testing with both Full Threshold and SITA strategies using a Humphrey HFA 2 Model 740 perimeter. The testing time, reproducibility, and measured threshold sensitivity of the two strategies were compared.METHODSThirty-eight healthy volunteers and 80 patients with primary open-angel glaucoma underwent central 30-2 testing with both Full Threshold and SITA strategies using a Humphrey HFA 2 Model 740 perimeter. The testing time, reproducibility, and measured threshold sensitivity of the two strategies were compared.The testing time for measurements with SITA was 56% lower in normal subjects and 45% lower in glaucoma patients than with Full Threshold. Cases having higher mean sensitivity or cases requiring longer testing time for Full Threshold had a greater percentage reduction in testing time for SITA. The test-retest variability studied in normal subjects was lower, but not significantly so, with SITA (2.9%) than with Full Threshold (3.4%). The mean sensitivities of SITA were higher (1 dB) than those of Full Threshold not only in normal subjects but also in glaucoma patients. This higher sensitivity in SITA was found irrespective of the order of the two tests both in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. Analysis by each testing point revealed that the difference was not dependent on the test point position or the sensitivity at the point.RESULTSThe testing time for measurements with SITA was 56% lower in normal subjects and 45% lower in glaucoma patients than with Full Threshold. Cases having higher mean sensitivity or cases requiring longer testing time for Full Threshold had a greater percentage reduction in testing time for SITA. The test-retest variability studied in normal subjects was lower, but not significantly so, with SITA (2.9%) than with Full Threshold (3.4%). The mean sensitivities of SITA were higher (1 dB) than those of Full Threshold not only in normal subjects but also in glaucoma patients. This higher sensitivity in SITA was found irrespective of the order of the two tests both in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. Analysis by each testing point revealed that the difference was not dependent on the test point position or the sensitivity at the point.SITA has greater patient acceptability than the Full Threshold strategy. However, the difference in sensitivity can be considerable in a serial comparison of one patient's fields tested by Full Threshold and SITA.CONCLUSIONSITA has greater patient acceptability than the Full Threshold strategy. However, the difference in sensitivity can be considerable in a serial comparison of one patient's fields tested by Full Threshold and SITA.
Author Fukushima, Kazumi
Suzuki, Yasuyuki
Shirato, S.
Inoue, Rishu
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: S.
  surname: Shirato
  fullname: Shirato, S.
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Rishu
  surname: Inoue
  fullname: Inoue, Rishu
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Kazumi
  surname: Fukushima
  fullname: Fukushima, Kazumi
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Yasuyuki
  surname: Suzuki
  fullname: Suzuki, Yasuyuki
BackLink http://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1650904$$DView record in Pascal Francis
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9951638$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNptkUFLHTEQgEOx6PPZo0dhkeJt20my2STe5FFbi9BDFbyF2bxZiezLPpPdFv99Y30IlZ4GZr4ZZr45ZHtxjMTYMYdPHEB_zgAN1wAKuIV3bMEbqWoN4m6PLUALXhsp7g7YYc4PUFCp-D7bt1bxVpoF-74aQgweh4p-4TDjFMZYjX318-rm4rzCKtLvqsdNGJ6es1tKYUNTCr6aKE8h3ld5SjjRfaB8xN73OGT6sItLdnv55Wb1rb7-8fVqdXFd-4bDVK-NkdSLxrcSkXe21RoFGRBG4lp3vlWN5kJZ6LBDWhutLCrdkSbbddp4uWRnL3O3aXycyxpuE7KnYcBI45xda1WrjW0LePoGfBjnFMtuTkjQRptGFOhkB83dhtZuWy7E9OR2hkr9466OuWjqE0Yf8ivGWwW2WF0y-YL5NOacqHc-TH9tFj9hcBzc87fcP98qXfWbrte5_-X_AMzMk1g
CODEN GACODL
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1007_s10384_007_0469_7
crossref_primary_10_1177_112067210701700208
crossref_primary_10_1016_S0161_6420_02_01241_1
crossref_primary_10_1016_S0161_6420_02_01974_7
crossref_primary_10_1038_s41598_022_11044_8
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ajo_2018_10_010
crossref_primary_10_1177_112067210501500611
crossref_primary_10_1007_s00417_015_3132_x
crossref_primary_10_1167_tvst_10_9_2
crossref_primary_10_1076_noph_24_3_411_7143
crossref_primary_10_1097_00055735_199912000_00009
crossref_primary_10_3233_WOR_210997
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ajo_2019_08_013
crossref_primary_10_1111_j_1444_0938_2005_tb06671_x
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2021_03_032
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2017_04_009
crossref_primary_10_1177_112067210801800204
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ogla_2022_08_006
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ophtha_2006_02_014
crossref_primary_10_1155_2020_7139649
crossref_primary_10_3109_02713683_2013_867353
crossref_primary_10_1007_s00234_019_02281_2
crossref_primary_10_1177_112067210501500205
crossref_primary_10_1109_ACCESS_2021_3080687
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_survophthal_2024_09_005
crossref_primary_10_3109_08820530009037869
crossref_primary_10_1016_S0002_9394_02_01683_5
crossref_primary_10_1167_tvst_2_4_3
crossref_primary_10_1016_S0161_6420_02_01726_8
crossref_primary_10_1097_IJG_0000000000002505
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright 1999 INIST-CNRS
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999
Copyright_xml – notice: 1999 INIST-CNRS
– notice: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999
DBID AAYXX
CITATION
IQODW
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
3V.
7TK
7X7
7XB
88E
8AO
8FI
8FJ
8FK
ABUWG
AFKRA
BENPR
CCPQU
FYUFA
GHDGH
K9.
M0S
M1P
PHGZM
PHGZT
PJZUB
PKEHL
PPXIY
PQEST
PQQKQ
PQUKI
PRINS
7X8
DOI 10.1007/s004170050190
DatabaseName CrossRef
Pascal-Francis
Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
ProQuest Central (Corporate)
Neurosciences Abstracts
Health & Medical Collection
ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)
Medical Database (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Pharma Collection
Hospital Premium Collection
Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)
ProQuest Central (Alumni)
ProQuest Central UK/Ireland
ProQuest Central
ProQuest One Community College
Health Research Premium Collection
Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
ProQuest Health & Medical Collection
Medical Database
ProQuest Central Premium
ProQuest One Academic (New)
ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection
ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)
ProQuest One Health & Nursing
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)
ProQuest One Academic
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
ProQuest Central China
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)
ProQuest One Community College
ProQuest One Health & Nursing
ProQuest Pharma Collection
ProQuest Central China
ProQuest Central
ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection
Health Research Premium Collection
Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition)
Health & Medical Research Collection
ProQuest Central (New)
ProQuest Medical Library (Alumni)
ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition
ProQuest Hospital Collection
Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)
Neurosciences Abstracts
ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni)
ProQuest Health & Medical Complete
ProQuest Medical Library
ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
ProQuest One Academic
ProQuest One Academic (New)
ProQuest Central (Alumni)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE - Academic
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: EIF
  name: MEDLINE
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 3
  dbid: BENPR
  name: ProQuest Central
  url: https://www.proquest.com/central
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Medicine
EISSN 1435-702X
EndPage 34
ExternalDocumentID 979632681
9951638
1650904
10_1007_s004170050190
Genre Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Comparative Study
GroupedDBID ---
-Y2
.55
.86
.VR
06C
06D
0R~
0VY
199
1N0
203
29I
29~
2J2
2JN
2JY
2KG
2KM
2LR
2P1
2VQ
2~H
30V
3O-
4.4
406
408
409
40D
40E
53G
5VS
67Z
6NX
78A
7X7
88E
8AO
8FI
8FJ
8UJ
95-
95.
95~
96X
AABHQ
AACDK
AAHNG
AAIAL
AAJBT
AAJKR
AANXM
AANZL
AAPKM
AARHV
AARTL
AASML
AATNV
AATVU
AAWCG
AAYIU
AAYQN
AAYTO
AAYXX
AAYZH
ABAKF
ABBBX
ABBRH
ABBXA
ABDBE
ABDZT
ABECU
ABFSG
ABFTV
ABHLI
ABIPD
ABJNI
ABJOX
ABKCH
ABKTR
ABLJU
ABMNI
ABMQK
ABNWP
ABPLI
ABQBU
ABQSL
ABSXP
ABTEG
ABTKH
ABTMW
ABULA
ABUWG
ABXPI
ACAOD
ACBXY
ACDTI
ACGFS
ACHSB
ACHXU
ACKNC
ACMDZ
ACMLO
ACOKC
ACOMO
ACPIV
ACPRK
ACSTC
ACZOJ
ADBBV
ADHIR
ADHKG
ADKPE
ADRFC
ADTPH
ADURQ
ADYFF
ADZKW
AEBTG
AEFQL
AEGAL
AEGNC
AEJHL
AEJRE
AEKMD
AEMSY
AENEX
AEOHA
AEPYU
AESKC
AETLH
AEVLU
AEXYK
AEZWR
AFBBN
AFDZB
AFHIU
AFKRA
AFLOW
AFWTZ
AFZKB
AGAYW
AGDGC
AGGDS
AGJBK
AGMZJ
AGQEE
AGQMX
AGRTI
AGWIL
AGWZB
AGYKE
AHBYD
AHIZS
AHKAY
AHMBA
AHPBZ
AHSBF
AHWEU
AHYZX
AIAKS
AIGIU
AILAN
AITGF
AIXLP
AJBLW
AJRNO
AJZVZ
AKMHD
ALIPV
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
ALWAN
AMKLP
AMXSW
AMYLF
AOCGG
ARMRJ
ATHPR
AXYYD
AYFIA
AZFZN
B-.
BA0
BDATZ
BENPR
BGNMA
BPHCQ
BSONS
BVXVI
CAG
CCPQU
CITATION
COF
CSCUP
DDRTE
DL5
DNIVK
DPUIP
EBLON
EBS
EIOEI
EJD
EN4
ESBYG
F5P
FEDTE
FERAY
FFXSO
FIGPU
FINBP
FNLPD
FRRFC
FSGXE
FWDCC
FYUFA
G-Y
G-Z
GGCAI
GGRSB
GJIRD
GNWQR
GQ7
GQ8
GXS
HF~
HG5
HG6
HMCUK
HMJXF
HQYDN
HRMNR
HVGLF
HZ~
I09
IHE
IJ-
IKXTQ
IMOTQ
ITM
IWAJR
IXC
IZIGR
IZQ
I~X
I~Z
J-C
J0Z
JBSCW
JCJTX
JZLTJ
KDC
KOV
KPH
LAS
LLZTM
M1P
M4Y
MA-
N2Q
N9A
NB0
NPVJJ
NQJWS
NU0
O9-
O93
O9G
O9I
O9J
OAM
P19
P2P
P9S
PF0
PHGZM
PHGZT
PQQKQ
PROAC
PSQYO
PT4
PT5
Q2X
QOK
QOR
QOS
R89
R9I
RHV
RIG
RNI
ROL
RPX
RRX
RSV
RZK
S16
S27
S37
S3B
SAP
SDH
SDM
SHX
SISQX
SJYHP
SMD
SNE
SNPRN
SNX
SOHCF
SOJ
SPISZ
SRMVM
SSLCW
SSXJD
STPWE
SZ9
SZN
T13
TSG
TSK
TSV
TT1
TUC
U2A
U9L
UG4
UKHRP
UOJIU
UTJUX
UZXMN
VC2
VFIZW
W23
W48
WJK
WK8
X7M
YLTOR
Z45
ZMTXR
ZOVNA
~EX
2.D
28-
5QI
AAUYE
ABHQN
ABRTQ
ABWNU
ACUDM
ADKNI
AEFIE
AFEXP
AFOHR
AFQWF
AGQPQ
AHAVH
AIIXL
BBWZM
EBD
EMOBN
GRRUI
H13
IQODW
KOW
NDZJH
PJZUB
PPXIY
S1Z
S26
S28
SCLPG
SDE
SV3
T16
-53
-5E
-5G
-BR
-EM
-~C
3V.
AAAVM
ADINQ
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
GQ6
NPM
Z7U
Z81
Z82
Z83
Z87
Z8O
Z8U
Z8V
Z8W
Z91
7TK
7XB
8FK
K9.
PKEHL
PQEST
PQUKI
PRINS
PUEGO
7X8
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c410t-d883ef24c63aa1b9677a2e80283ad7bc654712590babaed8759a57be7e9bb78c3
IEDL.DBID BENPR
ISSN 0721-832X
IngestDate Fri Sep 05 03:12:25 EDT 2025
Sat Aug 23 13:28:57 EDT 2025
Wed Feb 19 02:32:57 EST 2025
Mon Jul 21 09:13:41 EDT 2025
Tue Jul 01 00:51:49 EDT 2025
Thu Apr 24 22:51:15 EDT 2025
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 1
Keywords Human
Static perimetry
Evaluation
Threshold detection
Visual field
Exploration
Algorithm
Eye disease
Sensitivity
Glaucoma (eye)
Reproducibility
Diagnosis
Automatic analysis
Language English
License http://www.springer.com/tdm
CC BY 4.0
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c410t-d883ef24c63aa1b9677a2e80283ad7bc654712590babaed8759a57be7e9bb78c3
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
PMID 9951638
PQID 230787842
PQPubID 48614
PageCount 6
ParticipantIDs proquest_miscellaneous_69567896
proquest_journals_230787842
pubmed_primary_9951638
pascalfrancis_primary_1650904
crossref_citationtrail_10_1007_s004170050190
crossref_primary_10_1007_s004170050190
ProviderPackageCode CITATION
AAYXX
PublicationCentury 1900
PublicationDate 1999-1-1
1999
1999-Jan
19990101
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 1999-01-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 01
  year: 1999
  text: 1999-1-1
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 1990
PublicationPlace Berlin
PublicationPlace_xml – name: Berlin
– name: Germany
– name: Heidelberg
PublicationTitle Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology
PublicationTitleAlternate Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol
PublicationYear 1999
Publisher Springer
Springer Nature B.V
Publisher_xml – name: Springer
– name: Springer Nature B.V
SSID ssj0004351
Score 1.7176465
Snippet To perform a clinical comparison of the Humphrey Full Threshold strategy with its intended replacement, SITA Standard, regarding testing time, reproducibility,...
· Purpose: To perform a clinical comparison of the Humphrey Full Threshold strategy with its intended replacement, SITA Standard, regarding testing time,...
SourceID proquest
pubmed
pascalfrancis
crossref
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
Enrichment Source
StartPage 29
SubjectTerms Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Algorithms
Biological and medical sciences
Female
Glaucoma and intraocular pressure
Glaucoma, Open-Angle - complications
Humans
Male
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Ophthalmology
Reproducibility of Results
Sensitivity and Specificity
Sensory Thresholds
Visual Field Tests - methods
Visual Fields
Title Clinical evaluation of SITA: a new family of perimetric testing strategies
URI https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9951638
https://www.proquest.com/docview/230787842
https://www.proquest.com/docview/69567896
Volume 237
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfZ3fS8MwEMcP3UAEEX9i1c08iE8Wt7VrEl9kkw0VHOIP2FtJ0tSX0U1b_3_v2qzTB31tQx7ukss3yeVzAOdJN0JhbJUvjJY-DorEV0pSlgXKAa7ouW6ZbTGJ7t7Ch2l_6nJzcpdWuYyJZaBO5obOyK8oYVlwEfZuFh8-FY2iy1VXQWMdmhiBRb8BzeFo8vS8ehgZlPUXiQHm49CdOshm-XaOSFOc8Cddisc_FqWthcrRPmlV2OJv5VmuQOMd2HbSkQ0qX-_Cms32YOPRXY7vw4NjfM7YCuHN5il7uX8dXDPFUECz6jyDvlZgf-Lzs4JIG9k7y4slN-IA3saj19s735VK8E3Y7RR-IkRg015ookCprpYR56pnBYkHlXBtqMQwShnZ0Uorm-AmRao-15ZbqTUXJjiERjbP7BEwHUW9VHIUUqEJVSIUdoM-0ynXMjA68eByaavYOI44lbOYxTUB-adpPbiomy8qgMZfDVu_DL9qTZC_TujBydIRsZtneVyPCg_O6r84QejWQ2V2_pXHEe4AuZCRB4eV9-qOJapLDD_H_3Z8ApsVqYFOXU6hUXx-2RbqkEK3YZ1PeRuag_FwOGm7sfcNGVncUw
linkProvider ProQuest
linkToHtml http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1LT9tAEB4FkKBSVZWX6tKUPQAnLBLbeHeRqiotQQmPCEGQcjO76zUX5ITaqOJH8R-Z8Sv0QG9c7dUcZufx7ev7AHbibojA2CpXGC1dDIrYVUrSLQuEA1zRc93itsUoHNwEp5PDSQue67cwdK2yrolFoY6nhvbID-jCsuAi8H7OHlwSjaLD1VpBo4yKM_v0F1ds2Y_hMU7vrued9Me_B24lKuCaoNvJ3VgI3yZeYEJfqa6WIefKs4LarIq5NiTGi01fdrTSysYI56U65NpyK7XmwvhodwGWEGVITKKlX_3R5dX8IaZf6D0S55iLqTKpSD2Lt3rEbMWJbqVL9f9VE_w4UxnOR1IKabyNdIuOd_IZPlVQlfXK2FqFlk3XYPmiOoxfh9OKU_SezSnD2TRh18Nx74gphoCdlfsn9LUUEiA9AJYTs0d6x7K85qnYgJt38eImLKbT1H4BpsPQSyRH4BaYQMVCoRmMEZ1wLX2jYwf2a19FpuItJ_mM-6hhXH7tWgf2muGzkrDjrYHtfxw_H02kgp3Aga16IqIqr7OoiUIHtpu_mJB0yqJSO33MohBXnFzI0IHNcvYawxLRLJa7r_81vA0rg_HFeXQ-HJ1twYeSJYJ2fL7BYv7n0bYRA-X6exV5DG7fO9hfAD3iF4g
linkToPdf http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwtV1NT9wwEB3BIiEkhGgLInz60PbUiN0kxHYlhPhasdCuUAFpb8F2HC6r7EKCqv60_jtmEidLD_TGNbHmMB57nu2Z9wA-p70YgbFVvjBa-hgUqa-UpCoLhANcUbtuVW0xjC_uosvRwWgO_ja9MFRW2eyJ1UadTgzdke9TwbLgIgr2M1cVcX3WP5o--iQgRQ-tjZpGHSFX9s9vPL0Vh4MznOovQdA_vz298J3AgG-iXrf0UyFCmwWRiUOlelrGnKvACkq5KuXakDAvAgDZ1UormyK0l-qAa8ut1JoLE6LdeVjgmBRFBxZOzofXv2ZNmWGl_Uj8Yz4um5Ej-Kz69ojlihP1So9ywauEuDxVBc5NVotqvI16q-zXX4UVB1vZcR1nH2DO5h9h8ad7mP8El45fdMxm9OFskrGbwe3xd6YYgndW36XQ11pUgLQBWEksH_kDK8qGs2IN7t7Fi-vQySe53QCm4zjIJEcQF5lIpUKhGYwXnXEtQ6NTD741vkqM4zAnKY1x0rIvv3atB1_b4dOavOOtgTv_OH42mggGu5EHW81EJG6NF0kbkR7stX9xcdKLi8rt5LlIYjx9ciFjD9br2WsNS0S2uPVt_tfwHixikCc_BsOrLViqCSPo8mcbOuXTs91BOFTqXRd4DO7fO9ZfAA9GG7Q
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Clinical+evaluation+of+SITA+%3A+a+new+family+of+perimetric+testing+strategies&rft.jtitle=Graefe%27s+archive+for+clinical+and+experimental+ophthalmology&rft.au=SHIRATO%2C+S&rft.au=INOUE%2C+R&rft.au=FUKUSHIMA%2C+K&rft.au=SUZUKI%2C+Y&rft.date=1999&rft.pub=Springer&rft.issn=0721-832X&rft.volume=237&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=29&rft.epage=34&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007%2Fs004170050190&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=1650904
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=0721-832X&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=0721-832X&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=0721-832X&client=summon