Jason Marsack to Adult
This is a "connection" page, showing publications Jason Marsack has written about Adult.
Connection Strength
1.577
-
Comparing the CamBlobs2 contrast sensitivity test to the near Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity test in normally-sighted young adults. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2021 09; 41(5):1125-1133.
Score: 0.114
-
Case Report: What Are We Doing for Our "20/20 Unhappy" Scleral Lens Patients? Optom Vis Sci. 2020 09; 97(9):826-830.
Score: 0.107
-
The Impact of Misaligned Wavefront-guided Correction in a Scleral Lens for the Highly Aberrated Eye. Optom Vis Sci. 2020 09; 97(9):732-740.
Score: 0.107
-
Visual interaction of 2nd to 5th order Zernike aberration terms with vertical coma. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2020 09; 40(5):669-679.
Score: 0.107
-
Alignment of a wavefront-guided scleral lens correction in the presence of a lens capsulotomy. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2020 12; 43(6):613-616.
Score: 0.103
-
Do Polymer Coatings Change the Aberrations of Conventional and Wavefront-guided Scleral Lenses? Optom Vis Sci. 2020 01; 97(1):28-35.
Score: 0.102
-
Application of Topographical Keratoconus Detection Metrics to Eyes of Individuals with Down Syndrome. Optom Vis Sci. 2019 09; 96(9):664-669.
Score: 0.100
-
Comparison of Wavefront-guided and Best Conventional Scleral Lenses after Habituation in Eyes with Corneal Ectasia. Optom Vis Sci. 2019 04; 96(4):238-247.
Score: 0.097
-
Variability in Objective Refraction for Persons with Down Syndrome. Optom Vis Sci. 2017 05; 94(5):574-581.
Score: 0.085
-
Wavefront-guided scleral lens correction in keratoconus. Optom Vis Sci. 2014 Oct; 91(10):1221-30.
Score: 0.071
-
Performance of wavefront-guided soft lenses in three keratoconus subjects. Optom Vis Sci. 2008 Dec; 85(12):E1172-8.
Score: 0.047
-
Uncorrected wavefront error and visual performance during RGP wear in keratoconus. Optom Vis Sci. 2007 Jun; 84(6):463-70.
Score: 0.043
-
Comparison of Unaided and Aided Visual Acuity in Adults With Down Syndrome. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2025 Jan 02; 14(1):30.
Score: 0.036
-
Visual Acuity Prediction Based on Different Refraction Types For Patients With Down Syndrome. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2023 09 01; 12(9):11.
Score: 0.033
-
Dioptric differences between clinically determined and metric-optimised refractions for adults with Down syndrome. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2023 09; 43(5):1016-1028.
Score: 0.032
-
Visual Acuity Outcomes in a Randomized Trial of Wavefront Metric-optimized Refractions in Adults with Down Syndrome. Optom Vis Sci. 2022 01 01; 99(1):58-66.
Score: 0.029
-
Greater higher order aberrations induced by toric orthokeratology versus soft toric multifocal contact lens wear. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2021 07; 41(4):726-735.
Score: 0.028
-
A Randomized Trial of Objective Spectacle Prescriptions for Adults with Down Syndrome: Baseline Data and Methods. Optom Vis Sci. 2021 01 01; 98(1):88-99.
Score: 0.027
-
Understanding the Impact of Individual Perceived Image Quality Features on Visual Performance. Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2020 04; 9(5):7.
Score: 0.026
-
A measure of tear inflow in habitual scleral lens wearers with and without midday fogging. Cont Lens Anterior Eye. 2019 02; 42(1):36-42.
Score: 0.024
-
Evaluating the use of a temperature sensor to monitor spectacle compliance in warm versus cold climates. Clin Exp Optom. 2019 03; 102(2):147-153.
Score: 0.023
-
Repeatability of Monocular Acuity Testing in Adults with and without Down Syndrome. Optom Vis Sci. 2018 03; 95(3):202-211.
Score: 0.022
-
Objective measurement of spectacle wear with a temperature sensor data logger. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2018 01; 38(1):37-47.
Score: 0.022
-
Is an objective refraction optimised using the visual Strehl ratio better than a subjective refraction? Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2017 05; 37(3):317-325.
Score: 0.021
-
Simulated Keratometry Repeatability in Subjects with and without Down Syndrome. Optom Vis Sci. 2016 11; 93(11):1356-1363.
Score: 0.021
-
A Comparison of Three Methods to Increase Scleral Contact Lens On-Eye Stability. Eye Contact Lens. 2015 Nov; 41(6):386-90.
Score: 0.019
-
Comparison of Whole Eye versus First-Surface Astigmatism in Down Syndrome. Optom Vis Sci. 2015 Jul; 92(7):804-14.
Score: 0.019
-
Change in visual acuity is well correlated with change in image-quality metrics for both normal and keratoconic wavefront errors. J Vis. 2013 Nov 26; 13(13):28.
Score: 0.017
-
Noise in wavefront error measurement from pupil center location uncertainty. J Refract Surg. 2010 Oct; 26(10):796-802.
Score: 0.013
-
Detecting significant change in wavefront error: how long does it take? Clin Exp Optom. 2009 May; 92(3):246-52.
Score: 0.012
-
Controlled induction of spherical aberration with custom soft contact lenses. Clin Exp Optom. 2009 May; 92(3):283-8.
Score: 0.012
-
Three-dimensional relationship between high-order root-mean-square wavefront error, pupil diameter, and aging. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 2007 Mar; 24(3):578-87.
Score: 0.010
-
Metrics of retinal image quality predict visual performance in eyes with 20/17 or better visual acuity. Optom Vis Sci. 2006 Sep; 83(9):635-40.
Score: 0.010
-
Measuring visual acuity--mesopic or photopic conditions, and high or low contrast letters? J Refract Surg. 2004 Sep-Oct; 20(5):S508-14.
Score: 0.009
-
Quantifying scatter in Shack-Hartmann images to evaluate nuclear cataract. J Refract Surg. 2004 Sep-Oct; 20(5):S515-22.
Score: 0.009
-
A population study on changes in wave aberrations with accommodation. J Vis. 2004 Apr 16; 4(4):272-80.
Score: 0.009
-
Interaction between aberrations to improve or reduce visual performance. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2003 Aug; 29(8):1487-95.
Score: 0.008