ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2018
Rod- versus cone-driven ERGs at different stimulus sizes in normal subjects and retinitis pigmentosa patients.
Article in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- ISCEV extended protocol for the photoreceptor directed ERG using full-field silent substitution stimuli.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2026Review
- The mesopic negative response (MeNR): a novel approach to assess retinal ganglion cell function within the rod pathway.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Electroretinographic responses to periodic stimuli in primates and the relevance for visual perception and for clinical studies.Visual neuroscience · 2024Review
- Perifoveal Cone- and Rod-Mediated Temporal Contrast Sensitivities in Stargardt Disease/Fundus Flavimaculatus.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2021Article
- The influence of temporal frequency and stimulus size on the relative contribution of luminance and L-/M-cone opponent mechanisms in heterochromatic flicker ERGs.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Responses of Postreceptoral Pathways Elicited by L- and M-Cone Isolating ON- and OFF-Electroretinograms in Glaucoma Patients.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2021Article
- Comparison of macaque and human L- and M-cone driven electroretinograms.Experimental eye research · 2021Article
- Relationship between stimulus size and different components of the electroretinogram (ERG) elicited by flashed stimuli.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo study how rod- and cone-driven responses depend on stimulus size in normal subjects and patients with retinitis pigmentosa (RP), and to show that comparisons between responses to full-field (FF) and smaller stimuli can be useful in diagnosing and monitoring disorders of the peripheral retina without the need for lengthy dark adaptation periods.
methodThe triple silent substitution technique was used to isolate L-cone-, M-cone- and rod-driven ERGs with 19, 18 and 33% photoreceptor contrasts, respectively, under identical mean luminance conditions. Experiments were conducted on five normal subjects and three RP patients. ERGs on control subjects were recorded at nine different temporal frequencies (between 2 and 60 Hz) for five different stimulus sizes: FF, 70°, 60°, 50° and 40° diameter circular stimuli. Experiments on RP patients involved rod- and L-cone-driven ERG measurements with FF and 40° stimuli at 8 and 48 Hz. Response amplitudes were defined as those of the first harmonic component after Fourier analysis.
resultsIn normal subjects, rod-driven responses displayed a fundamentally different behavior than cone-driven responses, particularly at low temporal frequencies. At low and intermediate temporal frequencies (≤ 12 Hz), rod-driven signals increased by a factor of about four when measured with smaller stimuli. In contrast, L- and M-cone-driven responses in this frequency region did not change substantially with stimulus size. At high temporal frequencies (≥ 24 Hz), both rod- and cone-driven response amplitudes decreased with decreasing stimulus size. Signals obtained from rod-isolating stimuli under these conditions are likely artefactual. Interestingly, in RP patients, both rod-driven and L-cone-driven ERGs were similar using 40° and FF stimuli.
conclusionThe increased responses with smaller stimuli in normal subjects to rod-isolating stimuli indicate that a fundamentally different mechanism drives the ERGs in comparison with the cone-driven responses. We propose that the increased responses are caused by stray light stimulating the peripheral retina, thereby allowing peripheral rod-driven function to be studied using the triple silent substitution technique at photopic luminances. The method is effective in studying impaired peripheral rod- and cone- function in RP patients.
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.