Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30481278›Full record

ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2018

Pulses of Melanopsin-Directed Contrast Produce Highly Reproducible Pupil Responses That Are Insensitive to a Change in Background Radiance.

Harrison McAdams, Aleksandra Igdalova, Manuel Spitschan, David H Brainard, Geoffrey K Aguirre

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Selective amplification of ipRGC signals accounts for interictal photophobia in migraine.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Harrison McAdamsDepartment of Neurology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States.
Aleksandra IgdalovaDepartment of Neurology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States.
Manuel SpitschanDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
David H BrainardDepartment of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States.
Geoffrey K AguirreDepartment of Neurology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States.

Funding

Scientific TransparencyP30EY001583 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI CLAIRE H MITCHELL · 1985 to 2026
$19.5M
Training in Alzheimer’s and Age-Related Neurodegenerative DiseasesT32AG000255 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI ALICE S CHEN-PLOTKIN, VIRGINIA M LEE · 1997 to 2026
$12.5M
Melanopsin and cone signals in human visual processingR01EY024681 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI AGUIRRE, GEOFFREY KARL, BRAINARD, DAVID H. · 2015 to 2018
$1.6M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY001583NEI NIH HHS R01 EY024681NIA NIH HHS T32 AG000255
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To measure the pupil response to pulses of melanopsin-directed contrast, and compare this response to those evoked by cone-directed contrast and spectrally narrowband stimuli. Methods: Three-second unipolar pulses were used to elicit pupil responses in human subjects across three sessions. Thirty subjects were studied in session 1, and most returned for sessions 2 and 3. The stimuli of primary interest were "silent substitution" cone- and melanopsin-directed modulations. Red and blue narrowband pulses delivered using the post-illumination pupil response (PIPR) paradigm were also studied. Sessions 1 and 2 were identical, whereas session 3 involved modulations around higher radiance backgrounds. The pupil responses were fit by a model whose parameters described response amplitude and temporal shape. Results: Group average pupil responses for all stimuli overlapped extensively across sessions 1 and 2, indicating high reproducibility. Model fits indicate that the response to melanopsin-directed contrast is prolonged relative to that elicited by cone-directed contrast. The group average cone- and melanopsin-directed pupil responses from session 3 were highly similar to those from sessions 1 and 2, suggesting that these responses are insensitive to background radiance over the range studied. The increase in radiance enhanced persistent pupil constriction to blue light. Conclusions: The group average pupil response to stimuli designed through silent substitution provides a reliable probe of the function of a melanopsin-mediated system in humans. As disruption of the melanopsin system may relate to clinical pathology, the reproducibility of response suggests that silent substitution pupillometry can test if melanopsin signals differ between clinical groups.

Indexed as

AdultContrast SensitivityFemaleHumansLightMaleMelanopsinPhotic StimulationPupilReflex, PupillaryRetinal Cone Photoreceptor CellsRod OpsinsYoung AdultMelanopsinRod Opsins

Identifiers

PMID30481278
PMCPMC6262648

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.