ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2020
Objective Assessment of the Effect of Optical Treatment on Magnocellular and Parvocellular-biased Visual Response in Anisometropic Amblyopia.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2020. 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.
- Understanding amblyopia from the perspective of neurovascular units: changes in the retina and brain.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Early impairment of magnocellular visual pathways mediated by isolated-check visual evoked potentials in primary open-angle glaucoma: a cross-sectional study.BMJ open ophthalmology · 2024Article
- Utility of isolated-check visual evoked potential technique in dysthyroid optic neuropathy.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Optical treatment can improve visual function in anisometropic amblyopia, but there is no electrophysiological evidence, and the underlying change in visual pathway remains unknown. Our aims were to characterize the functional loss in magnocellular and parvocellular visual pathways in anisometropic amblyopia at baseline and to investigate the effect of optical treatment on the 2 visual pathways. Methods: Using isolated-check visual-evoked potential, we measured the magnocellular- and parvocellular-biased contrast response functions in 15 normal controls (20.13 ± 3.93 years; mean ± standard deviation), 16 patients with anisometropic amblyopia (18.00 ± 6.04 years) who were fully refractive corrected before and 29 (19.41 ± 7.41 years) who had never been corrected. Twelve previously uncorrected amblyopes received optical treatment for more than 2 months and finished the follow-up measurement. Results: Both the magnocellular- and parvocellular-biased contrast response functions in the amblyopic eye exhibited significantly reduced response and weaker contrast gains. We also found that the uncorrected amblyopes showed a more severe response reduction in magnocellular-biased, but not parvocellular-biased condition when compared with those corrected, with a weaker initial contrast gain and lower maximal response. After optical treatment, 12 uncorrected amblyopes demonstrated improved visual acuity of the amblyopic eye and a significant response gain to magnocellular-biased but not parvocellular-biased stimuli. Conclusions: We demonstrated deficits to both magnocellular- and parvocellular-biased stimuli in subjects with anisometropic amblyopia. Optical treatment could produce neurophysiological changes in visual pathways even in older children and adults, which may be mediated through the magnocellular pathway.
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.