ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2018
Pulse waveform analysis on temporal changes in ocular blood flow due to caffeine intake: a comparative study between habitual and non-habitual groups.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel superpixel method to visualize fundus blood flow resistivity in healthy adults.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Clinical applications of laser speckle contrast imaging: a review.Journal of biomedical optics · 2019Review
- Effects of caffeine on intraocular pressure are subject to tolerance: a comparative study between low and high caffeine consumers.Psychopharmacology · 2019Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate and compare the temporal changes in pulse waveform parameters of ocular blood flow (OBF) between non-habitual and habitual groups due to caffeine intake.
methodThis study was conducted on 19 healthy subjects (non-habitual 8; habitual 11), non-smoking and between 21 and 30 years of age. Using laser speckle flowgraphy (LSFG), three areas of optical nerve head were analyzed which are vessel, tissue, and overall, each with ten pulse waveform parameters, namely mean blur rate (MBR), fluctuation, skew, blowout score (BOS), blowout time (BOT), rising rate, falling rate, flow acceleration index (FAI), acceleration time index (ATI), and resistive index (RI). Two-way mixed ANOVA was used to determine the difference between every two groups where p < 0.05 is considered significant.
resultThere were significant differences between the two groups in several ocular pulse waveform parameters, namely MBR (overall, vessel, tissue), BOT (overall), rising rate (overall), and falling rate (vessel), all with p < 0.05. In addition, the ocular pulse waveform parameters, i.e., MBR (overall), skew (tissue), and BOT (tissue) showed significant temporal changes within the non-habitual group, but not within the habitual group. The temporal changes in parameters MBR (vessel, tissue), skew (overall, vessel), BOT (overall, vessel), rising rate (overall), falling rate (overall, vessel), and FAI (tissue) were significant for both groups (habitual and non-habitual) in response to caffeine intake.
conclusionThe experiment results demonstrated caffeine does modulate OBF significantly and response differently in non-habitual and habitual groups. Among all ten parameters, MBR and BOT were identified as the suitable biomarkers to differentiate between the two groups.
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.