Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27445454›Full record

ArticleClinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.)2016

Evaluation of cone function by a handheld non-mydriatic flicker electroretinogram device.

Natsuko Nakamura, Kaoru Fujinami, Yoshinobu Mizuno, Toru Noda, Kazushige Tsunoda

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Comparing the RETevalDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. RDH5-Related Fundus Albipunctatus in a Large Japanese Cohort.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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.

Natsuko NakamuraLaboratory of Visual Physiology, Division of Vision Research, National Institute of Sensory Organs.
Kaoru FujinamiLaboratory of Visual Physiology, Division of Vision Research, National Institute of Sensory Organs.
Yoshinobu MizunoDepartment of Ophthalmology, National Hospital Organization, National Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Toru NodaDepartment of Ophthalmology, National Hospital Organization, National Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Kazushige TsunodaLaboratory of Visual Physiology, Division of Vision Research, National Institute of Sensory Organs.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeFull-field electroretinograms (ERGs) are used to evaluate retinal function in patients with various types of hereditary and acquired retinal diseases. However, ERG recordings require relatively invasive procedures, including pupillary dilation and the use of contact lens electrodes. Thus, it would be helpful to have a simpler and noninvasive screening method. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a new, handheld, portable ERG device, RETeval™, can be used to screen patients for cone dysfunction. PATIENTS AND

methodsThirty-five eyes of 35 patients who had reduced cone responses ascertained by a conventional ERG system using contact lens electrodes were studied. The causative diseases included achromatopsia, cone dystrophy, cone-rod dystrophy, retinitis pigmentosa, choroidal dystrophy, autoimmune retinopathy, and Stargardt disease. The flicker ERGs were recorded with the RETeval™ under undilated conditions with skin electrodes (stimulus strength, 3.0 cd·s/m(2); frequency, 28.3 Hz), and the responses were compared to that of 50 healthy eyes. The amplitudes and implicit times of the fundamental component of the flicker ERGs were analyzed in three age groups: Group A, ≤20 years; Group B, 21-40 years; and Group C, ≥41 years.

resultsIn all of the age groups, the amplitudes of the ERGs were significantly smaller and the implicit times significantly longer in patients with cone dysfunction than in the control eyes. All but one of the patients had flicker amplitudes lower than the mean -2.0 standard deviation of control eyes.

conclusionThe RETeval™ has a potential of being used to screen for cone dysfunction. The entire examination takes <5 minutes and does not require pupil dilatation or a contact lens electrode. Although the flicker responses do not provide information on the scotopic functions, the RETeval™ device can be used to determine which patients require additional full-field ERG testing with dilated pupils under both scotopic and photopic conditions.

Indexed as

cone dysfunctionflicker ERGRETeval™retina

Identifiers

PMID27445454
PMCPMC4936817

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.