ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2020
Verifying complaints of difficulties in night vision using electroretinography and dark adaptation tests.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 determine the electroretinographical and psychophysical parameters that can help to verify patients' complaints of reduced night vision.
methodsWe tested 275 consecutive patients with normal appearing fundi, complaining of visual difficulties at night, using flash electroretinography (ERG) and dark adaptation (DA) test. Two ERG parameters were used to assess a scotopic retinal function: the amplitude of the response to dim blue flash (the rod response) and the b-wave ratio (measured/expected). Dark adaptation was measured with green- and red-light stimuli after exposure to a bright, bleaching light. The psychophysical parameter of night vision was defined as the threshold for detection of the blue-green stimulus that was measured after 40-45 min in complete darkness.
resultsFifty-five patients were excluded from the analysis because of a discrepancy between the two ERG parameters in assessment of scotopic retinal function. The remaining 220 patients were divided into 4 groups: (1) normal ERG and normal DA, (2) subnormal ERG and subnormal DA, (3) normal ERG and subnormal DA and (4) subnormal ERG and normal DA. The ERG and DA tests supported the complaint of visual difficulties at night in 67 patients (group 2), while 34 patients were characterized as having normal scotopic visual function (group 1). The other 119 patients (groups 3 and 4) presented a diagnostic dilemma because one test (ERG or dark adaptation) showed normal scotopic function, while the other indicated subnormal scotopic function.
conclusionOur findings indicate that ERG is an essential, but not sufficient test for verifying patient's complaint on visual difficulties in the dark. We suggest using both electroretinography and psychophysical dark adaptation to test patients complaining of reduced night vision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31621038What 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.