ArticlePloS one2018
Early visual ERPs show stable body-sensitive patterns over a 4-week test period.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Repeated visual adaptation induces persistent behavioral and neural biases in body size perception.iScience · 2026Article
- Body size estimation is influenced by actual-ideal body size discrepancy: a series of studies among Chinese adolescent girls.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2025Article
- Reproducibility of evoked and induced MEG responses to proprioceptive stimulation of the ankle joint.Neuroimage. Reports · 2022Article
- Article
- You See What You Smell: Preferential Processing of Chemosensory Satiety Cues and Its Impact on Body Shape Perception.Brain sciences · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Event-related potential (ERP) studies feature among the most cited papers in the field of body representation, with recent research highlighting the potential of ERPs as neuropsychiatric biomarkers. Despite this, investigation into how reliable early visual ERPs and body-sensitive effects are over time has been overlooked. This study therefore aimed to assess the stability of early body-sensitive effects and visual P1, N1 and VPP responses. Participants were asked to identify pictures of their own bodies, other bodies and houses during an EEG test session that was completed at the same time, once a week, for four consecutive weeks. Results showed that amplitude and latency of early visual components and their associated body-sensitive effects were stable over the 4-week period. Furthermore, correlational analyses revealed that VPP component amplitude might be more reliable than VPP latency and specific electrode sites might be more robust indicators of body-sensitive cortical activity than others. These findings suggest that visual P1, N1 and VPP responses, alongside body-sensitive N1/VPP effects, are robust indications of neuronal activity. We conclude that these components are eligible to be considered as electrophysiological biomarkers relevant to body representation.
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.