ArticleJournal of current ophthalmology2019
Contrast and spatial frequency modulation for diagnosis of amblyopia: An electrophysiological approach.
Article in Journal of current ophthalmology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-Term Efficacy of the Combination of Active Vision Therapy and Occlusion in Children with Strabismic and Anisometropic Amblyopia.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Aging effects on contrast sensitivity in visual pathways: A pilot study on flicker adaptation.PloS one · 2021Article
- Characterization, passive and active treatment in strabismic amblyopia: a narrative review.International journal of ophthalmology · 2020Review
- Low-contrast Pattern-reversal Visual Evoked Potential in Different Spatial Frequencies.Journal of ophthalmic & vision researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the diagnostic value of visual evoked potentials (VEPs) and to find out which test setting has the most sensitivity and specificity for amblyopia diagnosis.
methodsThirty-three adult anisometropic amblyopes were intended in this study and were tested for visual evoked potentials with different stimulus conditions including three spatial frequencies [1, 2, and 4-cycles-per-degree (cpd)] at four contrast levels (100, 50, 25, and 5%). We also tested psychophysical contrast sensitivity and compared the results with electrophysiological ones. We plotted Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve for each VEP recording and psychophysical contrast sensitivity to evaluate the area under the curve, sensitivity, specificity, and cut-point value of each test stimulus for detecting amblyopic eyes.
resultsThirty-three amblyopic and 33 non-amblyopic eyes were examined for psychophysical contrast sensitivity and VEPs. Area under the ROC curve (AURC) findings showed that VEP with different stimulus settings can significantly detect amblyopic eyes, as well as psychophysical contrast sensitivity test. We found that P100 amplitudes had the largest AURC in response to stimuli of 2-cpd spatial frequency at 50 (
conclusionAccording to our findings, assessment of VEP amplitudes in response to stimuli of 2-cpd spatial frequency at 50 and 25% contrast levels can best detect amblyopia with highest sensitivity and specificity and thus, are the protocols of choice for detection of amblyopic eyes.
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.