Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18250083›Full record

ArticleCerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991)2008

V1 projection zone signals in human macular degeneration depend on task, not stimulus.

Yoichiro Masuda, Serge O Dumoulin, Satoshi Nakadomari, Brian A Wandell

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991), 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 86 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
86citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

86 citing papers in PubMed, 150 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Cortical reorganization after long-term adaptation to retinal lesions in humans.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2013
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Increased Attentive Use Is Linked to More Idiosyncratic Functional Connections.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Cortical response to transient and long-term visual field loss.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025
    Article
  8. Motion Processing in Visual Cortex of Maculopathy Patients.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Yoichiro MasudaPsychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. massuuu@gmail.com
Serge O Dumoulin
Satoshi Nakadomari
Brian A Wandell
Jikei University School of Medicine · JPStanford University · US

Funding

WAVELENGTH DISCRIMINATION AT MODULATION THRESHOLDR01EY003164 · NEI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI WANDELL, BRIAN A · 1985 to 2011
$3.9M
NEI NIH HHS EY03164NEI NIH HHS R01 EY003164
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to assess abnormal cortical signals in humans with juvenile macular degeneration (JMD). These signals have been interpreted as indicating large-scale cortical reorganization. Subjects viewed a stimulus passively or performed a task; the task was either related or unrelated to the stimulus. During passive viewing, or while performing tasks unrelated to the stimulus, there were large unresponsive V1 regions. These regions included the foveal projection zone, and we refer to them as the lesion projection zone (LPZ). In 3 JMD subjects, we observed highly significant responses in the LPZ while they performed stimulus-related judgments. In control subjects, where we presented the stimulus only within the peripheral visual field, there was no V1 response in the foveal projection zone in any condition. The difference between JMD and control responses can be explained by hypotheses that have very different implications for V1 reorganization. In controls retinal afferents carry signals indicating the presence of a uniform (zero-contrast) region of the visual field. Deletion of retinal input may 1) spur the formation of new cortical pathways that carry task-dependent signals (reorganization), or 2) unmask preexisting task-dependent cortical signals that ordinarily are suppressed by the deleted signals (no reorganization).

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingAdultFeedbackFemaleFixation, OcularFovea CentralisGeniculate BodiesHumansMacular DegenerationMaleMiddle AgedModels, NeurologicalNeuronal PlasticityPhotic StimulationVisual CortexVisual Fields

Identifiers

PMID18250083
PMCPMC2733314
OpenAlexW2134779106

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.