ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2020
The photopic negative response of the Light-adapted 3.0 ERG in clinical settings.
Article in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- The luminance-response function of the photopic negative response (PhNR): analysing different stimulation, recording and measurement approaches.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2026Article
- The area under the waveform as an alternative measure of the photopic negative response.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Applications of Photopic Negative Response: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Ganglion cell function loss in extensive macular atrophy with pseudodrusen.International ophthalmology · 2025Observational
- Association analyses of the measurements of the photopic negative response evoked by two ISCEV protocols.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Impact of Myopia on the Utility of the Photopic Negative Response Ratio for Glaucoma Assessment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The Electroretinogram I-Wave, a Component Originating in the Retinal OFF-Pathway, Associates With a Myopia Genetic Risk Polymorphism.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2024Article
- Effects of Acute High-Altitude Exposure on Morphology and Function of Retinal Ganglion Cell in Mice.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2024Article
- Full-field electroretinogram recorded with skin electrodes in 6- to 12-year-old children.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2023Article
- Intereye structure-function relationship using photopic negative response in patients with glaucoma or glaucoma suspect.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Effect of spatial averaging on the amplitude ring ratio in multifocal electroretinography.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2022Article
- Prediction of glaucoma severity using parameters from the electroretinogram.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Relationship between stimulus size and different components of the electroretinogram (ERG) elicited by flashed stimuli.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2021Article
- The influence of mild cataract on ISCEV standard electroretinogram recorded from mydriatic eyes.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Photopic negative response using a handheld mini-ganzfeld stimulator in healthy adults: normative values, intra- and inter-session variability.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2021Article
- The effect of age on full-field electroretinograms recorded with skin electrodes.Fujita medical journal · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo analyze the effects of different methods of measurement on the photopic negative response (PhNR), recorded as part of a standard ISCEV Photopic 3.0 ERG responses from patients with a variety of clinical diagnoses.
methodsERGs were recorded from both eyes of 97 patients (187 eyes) as part of a standard clinical assessment. The average age was 56.4 ± 15.7 years, the gender balance was 35 M, 62F, and only recordable responses of acceptable quality were included. PhNR was measured at an identifiable trough before (PhNR1) and after the i-wave (PhNR2), and the amplitudes and peak times were compared with a-, b- and i-wave corresponding parameters. PhNR components were measured: from baseline and from b-wave peak. Correlation between PhNR troughs and with ERG parameters were tested for right eyes. The possibility to predict and substitute PhNR2 amplitude from PhNR1 amplitude was also tested.
resultsPhNR1 was recordable in 97.3% of eyes and PhNR2 in 85.6%. An identifiable PhNR2 peak was found to occur before 65 ms at ~ 50% of the records, while in ~ 38% of the cases was within 65-75 ms in ~ 12%-after 75 ms. The correlation between the PhNR1 and PhNR2 peaks was quite strong (with coefficients 0.81-0.98, depending on method of measurement, and slopes close to 1). The average difference between predicted and measured PhNR2 was reasonably small in absolute (< 2 µV) and relative (< 2%) terms. The correlations between PhNR amplitudes and other ERG component amplitudes showed different ranges of correlation coefficients depending on the method of measurement: for the a-wave amplitudes the range of coefficients was 0.48-0.73, while for the b-wave amplitudes it was 0.30-0.95 and 0.39-0.65 for i-wave.
conclusionThe strong correlation between the two PhNR troughs could allow using PhNR1 when PhNR2 is poorly defined due to artifacts. Different methods of PhNR measurement lead to different correlations with other ERG parameters, and this needs to be considered when analyzing and comparing PhNR data between studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31571069What 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.