ArticleBiomedical optics express2017
Hemispheric differences in electrical and hemodynamic responses during hemifield visual stimulation with graded contrasts.
Article in Biomedical optics express, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi-channel pattern VEPs with full and half field stimulation: methods of interpretation and diagnostic evaluation.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A multimodal neuroimaging technique based on electroencephalography (EEG) and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) was used with horizontal hemifield visual stimuli with graded contrasts to investigate the retinotopic mapping more fully as well as to explore hemispheric differences in neuronal activity, the hemodynamic response, and the neurovascular coupling relationship in the visual cortex. The fNIRS results showed the expected activation over the contralateral hemisphere for both the left and right hemifield visual stimulations. However, the EEG results presented a paradoxical lateralization, with the maximal response located over the ipsilateral hemisphere but with the polarity inversed components located over the contralateral hemisphere. Our results suggest that the polarity inversion as well as the latency advantage over the contralateral hemisphere cause the amplitude of the VEP over the contralateral hemisphere to be smaller than that over the ipsilateral hemisphere. Both the neuronal and hemodynamic responses changed logarithmically with the level of contrast in the hemifield visual stimulations. Moreover, the amplitudes and latencies of the visual evoked potentials (VEPs) were linearly correlated with the hemodynamic responses despite differences in the slopes.
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.