ArticleVision research2013
Effects of prematurity on the development of contrast sensitivity: testing the visual experience hypothesis.
Article in Vision research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Visual pathway function in adults born preterm with very low birth weight: a two-country birth cohort study.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Longitudinal caregiver-reported motor development in infants born at term and preterm.Developmental medicine and child neurology · 2024Article
- Color and newborn intensive care unit design: executive summary.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023Review
- Visual Acuity and Contrast Sensitivity in Preterm and Full-Term Children Using a Novel Digital Test.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Calibrating Vision: Concepts and Questions.Vision research · 2022Review
- Comparison of spin-echo and gradient-echo T1-weighted and spin-echo T2-weighted images at 3T in evaluating term-neonatal myelination.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2015Article
- Delayed early primary visual pathway development in premature infants: high density electrophysiological evidence.PloS one · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In order to investigate the effects of visual experience on early visual development, the current study compared contrast sensitivity across infants born with different degrees of moderate-to-late prematurity. Here the logic is that at any given postterm age, the most premature infants will have the oldest postnatal age. Given that postnatal age is a proxy for visual experience, the visual experience hypothesis predicts that infants who are more premature, yet healthy, should have higher sensitivity. Luminance (light/dark) and chromatic (red/green) contrast sensitivities (CS) were measured in 236 healthy infants (born -10 to +2 weeks relative to due date) between 5 and 32 weeks postterm age from due date and 8-38 weeks postnatal from birth date. For chromatic CS, we found clear evidence that infants who were most premature within our sample had the highest sensitivity. Specifically, 4-10 additional weeks of visual experience, by virtue of being born early, enhanced chromatic CS. For luminance CS, similar but weaker results were seen. Here, only infants with an additional 6-10 weeks of visual experience, and only at later age points in development, showed enhanced sensitivity. However, CS in preterm infants was still below that of fullterm infants with equivalent postnatal age. In sum, these results suggest that chromatic CS is influenced more by prematurity (and possibly visual experience) than luminance CS, which has implications for differential development of parvocellular and magnocellular pathways.
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.