ArticlePloS one2017
Cognitive processing of orientation discrimination in anisometropic amblyopia.
Article in PloS one, 2017. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychophysical assessment of face perception deficits in adults with amblyopia through top-down and bottom-up visual processing pathways.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Psychophysical Reverse Correlation Revealed Broader Orientation Tuning and Prolonged Reaction Time in Amblyopia.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2022Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cognition is very important in our daily life. However, amblyopia has abnormal visual cognition. Physiological changes of the brain during processes of cognition could be reflected with ERPs. So the purpose of this study was to investigate the speed and the capacity of resource allocation in visual cognitive processing in orientation discrimination task during monocular and binocular viewing conditions of amblyopia and normal control as well as the corresponding eyes of the two groups with ERPs. We also sought to investigate whether the speed and the capacity of resource allocation in visual cognitive processing vary with target stimuli at different spatial frequencies (3, 6 and 9 cpd) in amblyopia and normal control as well as between the corresponding eyes of the two groups. Fifteen mild to moderate anisometropic amblyopes and ten normal controls were recruited. Three-stimulus oddball paradigms of three different spatial frequency orientation discrimination tasks were used in monocular and binocular conditions in amblyopes and normal controls to elicit event-related potentials (ERPs). Accuracy (ACC), reaction time (RT), the latency of novelty P300 and P3b, and the amplitude of novelty P300 and P3b were measured. Results showed that RT was longer in the amblyopic eye than in both eyes of amblyopia and non-dominant eye in control. Novelty P300 amplitude was largest in the amblyopic eye, followed by the fellow eye, and smallest in both eyes of amblyopia. Novelty P300 amplitude was larger in the amblyopic eye than non-dominant eye and was larger in fellow eye than dominant eye. P3b latency was longer in the amblyopic eye than in the fellow eye, both eyes of amblyopia and non-dominant eye of control. P3b latency was not associated with RT in amblyopia. Neural responses of the amblyopic eye are abnormal at the middle and late stages of cognitive processing, indicating that the amblyopic eye needs to spend more time or integrate more resources to process the same visual task. Fellow eye and both eyes in amblyopia are slightly different from the dominant eye and both eyes in normal control at the middle and late stages of cognitive processing. Meanwhile, abnormal extents of amblyopic eye do not vary with three different spatial frequencies used in our study.
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.