Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23658786›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Assessment of night vision problems in patients with congenital stationary night blindness.

Mieke M C Bijveld, Maria M van Genderen, Frank P Hoeben, Amir A Katzin, Ruth M A van Nispen, Frans C C Riemslag, Astrid M L Kappers

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Development and Validation of the Assessment of Low Luminance Vision-Related Activities.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Observational
  2. Quality of Life in Patients with Posterior Segment Eye Diseases.Journal of ophthalmic & vision research · 2026
    Review
  3. A novel homozygous nonsense variant inOphthalmic genetics · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A non-conducting role of the CabioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Mice LackingInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  10. Congenital Stationary Night Blindness: Clinical and Genetic Features.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Transgenic Expression ofTranslational vision science & technology · 2020
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Channeling Vision: CaBioMed research international · 2018
    Review
  20. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mieke M C BijveldBartiméus Institute for the Visually Impaired, Zeist, The Netherlands. mbijveld@bartimeus.nl
Maria M van Genderen
Frank P Hoeben
Amir A Katzin
Ruth M A van Nispen
Frans C C Riemslag
Astrid M L Kappers
Bartiméus · NLAmsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NLVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Congenital Stationary Night Blindness (CSNB) is a retinal disorder caused by a signal transmission defect between photoreceptors and bipolar cells. CSNB can be subdivided in CSNB2 (rod signal transmission reduced) and CSNB1 (rod signal transmission absent). The present study is the first in which night vision problems are assessed in CSNB patients in a systematic way, with the purpose of improving rehabilitation for these patients. We assessed the night vision problems of 13 CSNB2 patients and 9 CSNB1 patients by means of a questionnaire on low luminance situations. We furthermore investigated their dark adapted visual functions by the Goldmann Weekers dark adaptation curve, a dark adapted static visual field, and a two-dimensional version of the "Light Lab". In the latter test, a digital image of a living room with objects was projected on a screen. While increasing the luminance of the image, we asked the patients to report on detection and recognition of objects. The questionnaire showed that the CSNB2 patients hardly experienced any night vision problems, while all CSNB1 patients experienced some problems although they generally did not describe them as severe. The three scotopic tests showed minimally to moderately decreased dark adapted visual functions in the CSNB2 patients, with differences between patients. In contrast, the dark adapted visual functions of the CSNB1 patients were more severely affected, but showed almost no differences between patients. The results from the "2D Light Lab" showed that all CSNB1 patients were blind at low intensities (equal to starlight), but quickly regained vision at higher intensities (full moonlight). Just above their dark adapted thresholds both CSNB1 and CSNB2 patients had normal visual fields. From the results we conclude that night vision problems in CSNB, in contrast to what the name suggests, are not conspicuous and generally not disabling.

Indexed as

Dark AdaptationNight VisionPattern Recognition, VisualVisual AcuityAdolescentAdultCase-Control StudiesChildElectroretinographyEye Diseases, HereditaryFemaleGenetic Diseases, X-LinkedHumansLightMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID23658786
PMCPMC3643903
OpenAlexW2012375504

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.