ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2017
Visual Prosthesis: Interfacing Stimulating Electrodes with Retinal Neurons to Restore Vision.
Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bilateral retinal implants for improving visual restoration: a simulated bionic vision study.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2026Article
- Spatial variation of evoked potentials in porcine retinas characterized by multi electrode array upon stimulation via 3D pyrolytic carbon electrodes.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
- An arbitrary waveform neurostimulator for preclinical studies: design and verification.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2025Article
- Retinal Prostheses: Engineering and Clinical Perspectives for Vision Restoration.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Object recognition and localization enhancement in visual prostheses: a real-time mixed reality simulation.Biomedical engineering online · 2022Article
- Potential therapeutic strategies for photoreceptor degeneration: the path to restore vision.Journal of translational medicine · 2022Review
- Implications of Neural Plasticity in Retinal Prosthesis.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2022Article
- Research Progress on the Flexibility of an Implantable Neural Microelectrode.Micromachines · 2022Review
- Rapid Effects of Vagus Nerve Stimulation on Sensory Processing Through Activation of Neuromodulatory Systems.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Review
- Morphological Factors that Underlie Neural Sensitivity to Stimulation in the Retina.Advanced nanobiomed research · 2021Article
- The impact of synchronous versus asynchronous electrical stimulation in artificial vision.Journal of neural engineering · 2021Review
- Improving the Effect of Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS): A Systematic Review.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Review
- Bayesian inference for biophysical neuron models enables stimulus optimization for retinal neuroprosthetics.eLife · 2020Article
- Graphene Oxide-Based Nanomaterials: An Insight into Retinal Prosthesis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Probing and predicting ganglion cell responses to smooth electrical stimulation in healthy and blind mouse retina.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Article
- Toward Long-Term Communication With the Brain in the Blind by Intracortical Stimulation: Challenges and Future Prospects.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Article
- Editorial: A Conversation With the Brain: Can We Speak Its Language?Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Article
- Visual prostheses, optogenetics, stem cell and gene therapies: splitting the cake.Neural regeneration research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The bypassing of degenerated photoreceptors using retinal neurostimulators is helping the blind to recover functional vision. Researchers are investigating new ways to improve visual percepts elicited by these means as the vision produced by these early devices remain rudimentary. However, several factors are hampering the progression of bionic technologies: the charge injection limits of metallic electrodes, the mechanical mismatch between excitable tissue and the stimulating elements, neural and electric crosstalk, the physical size of the implanted devices, and the inability to selectively activate different types of retinal neurons. Electrochemical and mechanical limitations are being addressed by the application of electromaterials such as conducting polymers, carbon nanotubes and nanocrystalline diamonds, among other biomaterials, to electrical neuromodulation. In addition, the use of synthetic hydrogels and cell-laden biomaterials is promising better interfaces, as it opens a door to establishing synaptic connections between the electrode material and the excitable cells. Finally, new electrostimulation approaches relying on the use of high-frequency stimulation and field overlapping techniques are being developed to better replicate the neural code of the retina. All these elements combined will bring bionic vision beyond its present state and into the realm of a viable, mainstream therapy for vision loss.
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.