REFERENCES
- Artes P H, McLeod D, Henson D B. Response time as a discriminator between true- and false-positive responses in suprathreshold perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002; 43: 129–132
- Dettmers C, Weiller C. Fahreignung bei neurologischen Erkrankungen. Hippocampus, Bad Honnef 2004
- Kasten E, Wust S, Behrens-Baumann W, Sabel B A. Computer-based training for the treatment of partial blindness. Nat Med. 1998; 4: 1083–1087
- Myer R S, Ball K K, Kalin T D, Roth D L, Goode K T. Relation of useful field of view and other screening tests to on-road driving performance. Percept Mot Skills. 2000; 91: 279–290
- Reinhard J, Schreiber A, Schiefer U, et al. Does visual restitution training change absolute homonymous visual field defect? A fundus-controlled study. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005; 89: 30–35
- Scialfa C T, Thomas D M, Joffe K M. Age differences in the useful field of view: an eye movement analysis. Optom Vis Sci. 1994; 71: 736–742
- Trauzettel-Klosinski S. Eccentric fixation with hemianopic field defects: A valuable strategy to improve reading ability and an indication of cortical plasticity. Neuro-Ophthalmology. 1997; 18: 117–131
- Verlohr D, Dannheim F. Visual performance test: Indications for compensational visual rehabilitation training and first results. Strabismus. 2007; 15(1)xx–xx
- Zangemeister W H, Poppensieker K, Hoekendorf H. Kognitive Gesichtsfeldrehabilitation mittels Strategien koordinierter Blickmotorik. Shaker, Aachen 1999
- Zihl J, Von Cramon D. Zerebrale Sehstörungen. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart 1986