Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16033933›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neurophysiology2005

Cortical representation of space around the blind spot.

Holger Awater, Jess R Kerlin, Karla K Evans, Frank Tong

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of neurophysiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 97 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Neural correlates of perceptual filling-in of an artificial scotoma in humans.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2007
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Differential Impacts of Strabismic and Anisometropic Amblyopia on the Mesoscale Functional Organization of the Human Visual Cortex.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Rapid topographic reorganization in adult human primary visual cortex (V1) during noninvasive and reversible deprivation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Inflation versus filling-in: why we feel we see more than we actually do in peripheral vision.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2018
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Predictions of Visual Content across Eye Movements and Their Modulation by Inferred Information.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2015
    Article
  20. fMRI of the rod scotoma elucidates cortical rod pathways and implications for lesion measurements.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Holger AwaterDept. of Psychology, Vanderbilt University, 301 Wilson Hall, Nashville, TN, 37203, USA.
Jess R Kerlin
Karla K Evans
Frank Tong
Vanderbilt University · US

Funding

Neural Mechanisms of Human Visual PerceptionR01EY014202 · NEI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI TONG, FRANK · 2002 to 2004
$808k
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY014202NEI NIH HHS R01 EY-14202
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The neural mechanism that mediates perceptual filling-in of the blind spot is still under discussion. One hypothesis proposes that the cortical representation of the blind spot is activated only under conditions that elicit perceptual filling-in and requires congruent stimulation on both sides of the blind spot. Alternatively, the passive remapping hypothesis proposes that inputs from regions surrounding the blind spot infiltrate the representation of the blind spot in cortex. This theory predicts that independent stimuli presented to the left and right of the blind spot should lead to neighboring/overlapping activations in visual cortex when the blind-spot eye is stimulated but separated activations when the fellow eye is stimulated. Using functional MRI, we directly tested the remapping hypothesis by presenting flickering checkerboard wedges to the left or right of the spatial location of the blind spot, either to the blind-spot eye or to the fellow eye. Irrespective of which eye was stimulated, we found separate activations corresponding to the left and right wedges. We identified the centroid of the activations on a cortical flat map and measured the distance between activations. Distance measures of the cortical gap across the blind spot were accurate and reliable (mean distance: 6-8 mm across subjects, SD approximately 1 mm within subjects). Contrary to the predictions of the remapping hypothesis, cortical distances between activations to the two wedges were equally large for the blind-spot eye and fellow eye in areas V1 and V2/V3. Remapping therefore appears unlikely to account for perceptual filling-in at an early cortical level.

Indexed as

AdultBrain MappingEvoked Potentials, VisualHumansMaleNerve NetOptic DiskPhotic StimulationVisual CortexVisual FieldsVisual PathwaysVisual Perception

Identifiers

PMID16033933
PMCPMC1401501
OpenAlexW2167159341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.