Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26286330›Full record

ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2015

A method for estimating intrinsic noise in electroretinographic (ERG) signals.

Andrew J Zele, Beatrix Feigl, Pradeep K Kambhampati, Amithavikram R Hathibelagal, Jan Kremers

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Test-retest repeatability of the pattern electroretinogram and flicker electroretinogram.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2019
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Andrew J ZeleVisual Science Laboratory, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, School of Optometry and Vision Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. andrew.zele@qut.edu.au.
Beatrix FeiglMedical Retina Laboratory, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, School of Biomedical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. b.feigl@qut.edu.au.
Pradeep K KambhampatiMedical Retina Laboratory, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, School of Biomedical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Amithavikram R HathibelagalVisual Science Laboratory, Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, School of Optometry and Vision Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Jan KremersLaboratory for Retinal Physiology, Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany. jan.kremers@uk-erlangen.de.
Queensland University of Technology · AUUniversitätsklinikum Erlangen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo develop a signal processing paradigm for extracting ERG responses to temporal sinusoidal modulation with contrasts ranging from below perceptual threshold to suprathreshold contrasts and estimate the magnitude of intrinsic noise in ERG signals at different stimulus contrasts.

methodsPhotopic test stimuli were generated using a 4-primary Maxwellian view optical system. The 4-primary lights were sinusoidally temporally modulated in-phase (36 Hz; 2.5-50% Michelson contrast). The stimuli were presented in 1-s epochs separated by a 1-ms blank interval and repeated 160 times (160.160-s duration) during the recording of the continuous flicker ERG from the right eye using DTL fibre electrodes. After artefact rejection, the ERG signal was extracted using Fourier transforms in each of the 1-s epochs where a stimulus was presented. The signal processing allows for computation of the intrinsic noise distribution in addition to the signal-to-noise (SNR) ratio.

resultsWe provide the initial report that the ERG intrinsic noise distribution is independent of stimulus contrast, whereas SNR decreases linearly with decreasing contrast until the noise limit at ~2.5%. The 1-ms blank intervals between epochs de-correlated the ERG signal at the line frequency (50 Hz) and thus increased the SNR of the averaged response. We confirm that response amplitude increases linearly with stimulus contrast. The phase response shows a shallow positive relationship with stimulus contrast.

conclusionsThis new technique will enable recording of intrinsic noise in ERG signals above and below perceptual visual threshold and is suitable for measurement of continuous rod and cone ERGs across a range of temporal frequencies, and post-receptoral processing in the primary retinogeniculate pathways at low stimulus contrasts. The intrinsic noise distribution may have application as a biomarker for detecting changes in disease progression or treatment efficacy.

Indexed as

Signal-To-Noise RatioAdultArtifactsElectroretinographyFemaleFourier AnalysisHumansLightMaleMiddle AgedPhotic StimulationPhotoreceptor Cells, VertebrateSignal Transduction4-primary photostimulatorElectroretinogram (ERG)NoiseSignal to noise

Identifiers

PMID26286330
OpenAlexW1159887788

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.