ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2011
The relationship between stimulus intensity and response amplitude for the photopic negative response of the flash electroretinogram.
Article in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- The rapid N-wave as a potentially useful measure of the photopic negative response.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2020Trial
- The luminance-response function of the photopic negative response (PhNR): analysing different stimulation, recording and measurement approaches.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Long-term blue light rearing does not affect in vivo retinal function in young rhesus monkeys.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Clinical electrophysiology of the optic nerve and retinal ganglion cells.Eye (London, England) · 2021Review
- Photopic negative response using a handheld mini-ganzfeld stimulator in healthy adults: normative values, intra- and inter-session variability.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2021Article
- The photopic negative response (PhNR): measurement approaches and utility in glaucoma.International ophthalmology · 2020Review
- Short-Term Changes in the Photopic Negative Response Following Intraocular Pressure Lowering in Glaucoma.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2020Article
- Electoretinographic evidence of retinal ganglion cell-dependent function in schizophrenia.Schizophrenia research · 2020Article
- The photopic negative response of the Light-adapted 3.0 ERG in clinical settings.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2020Article
- A Comparison of the RETeval Sensor Strip and DTL Electrode for Recording the Photopic Negative Response.Translational vision science & technology · 2018Article
- Optimizing a Portable ERG Device for Glaucoma Clinic: The Effect of Interstimulus Frequency on the Photopic Negative Response.Translational vision science & technology · 2018Article
- Baseline Detrending for the Photopic Negative Response.Translational vision science & technology · 2018Article
- ISCEV extended protocol for the photopic negative response (PhNR) of the full-field electroretinogram.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2018Article
- Intensity response function of the photopic negative response (PhNR): effect of age and test-retest reliability.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2017Article
- Electroretinography in glaucoma diagnosis.Current opinion in ophthalmology · 2016Review
- Spectral characteristics of the PhNR in the full-field flash electroretinogram of normals and glaucoma patients.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2012Article
- The photopic negative response of the flash electroretinogram in multiple sclerosis.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between stimulus intensity and response amplitude for the photopic negative response (PhNR) of the flash ERG. Specific aims were (i) to determine whether a generalized Naka-Rushton function provided a good fit to the intensity-response data and (ii) to determine the variability of the parameters of the best-fitting Naka-Rushton models. Electroretinograms were recorded in 18 participants, on two occasions, using both DTL fibre and skin active electrodes, in response to Ganzfeld red stimuli (Lee filter "terry red") ranging in stimulus strength from -1.30 to 0.53 log cd.s.m(-2) (0.28-2.11 log phot td.s) presented over a steady blue background (Schott glass filter BG28; 3.9 log scot td). PhNR amplitude was measured from b-wave peak and from pre-stimulus baseline. The Naka-Rushton function was fitted to all intensity-response data, and parameters, 'n', 'Vmax' and 'K' were obtained. Coefficients of variation (CoV), and inter-ocular and inter-session limits of agreement (LoA) were calculated for both Naka-Rushton parameters. A generalized Naka-Rushton function was found to provide a good fit to the intensity-response data, except at the highest stimulus intensity, where a reduction in amplitude occurred in many individuals. The 'Vmax' parameter was less variable than 'K' for all intensity-response data. Variability was lower for DTL than skin electrodes, and for peak-to-trough PhNR measurements, compared to baseline-to-trough. This study has demonstrated for the first time that the Naka-Rushton model provides a useful means of quantifying the intensity-response relationship of the PhNR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.