ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2014
Human flicker electroretinography using different temporal modulations at mesopic and photopic luminance levels.
Article in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Test-retest repeatability of the pattern electroretinogram and flicker electroretinogram.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2019Article
- Rod- and cone-isolated flicker electroretinograms and their response summation characteristics.Visual neuroscience · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElectroretinographic measurement instruments allow the variation of several stimulation parameters enabling to study a wide range of retinal processes. The purpose of the present study was to measure human flicker electroretinograms (ERGs) varying temporal modulation, temporal frequency and mean luminance in the photopic and higher mesopic ranges where the change from cone to rod dominance occurs.
methodsFourteen healthy subjects (mean age = 31 ± 6) participated in this study. ERG recordings were performed with the RetiPort system (Roland Consult, Germany). The stimuli were ON and OFF sawtooth waves, square wave and sine wave. The temporal frequencies were 4 and 8 Hz. The mean luminance varied from 1 to 60 cd/m(2).
resultsThe results confirmed the possibility to distinguish between rod- and cone-dominated retinal responses when using the flicker ERG at different temporal frequencies and luminances. We have also evaluated the responses at luminance levels at which the transition between rod- and cone-dominated responses occurs. This transition between rod- and cone-dominated flicker ERG responses is indicated by a significant change in the response characteristics between 4 and 8 cd/m(2) (between 200 and 400 phot Td).
conclusionsThe findings on the transition between rod- and cone-dominated ERGs along with the demonstration of ERG responses to different temporal flicker modulations might be informative for the electrophysiologists when setting up the stimulus at mesopic and photopic luminance levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24969135What 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.