ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2020
Comparison of the performance of six stimulus paradigms in visual acuity assessment based on steady-state visual evoked potentials.
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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- SSVEP-based visual acuity threshold estimation: linear extrapolation to noise level baseline with various noise definition criteria.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2024Article
- Diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease via resting-state EEG: integration of spectrum, complexity, and synchronization signal features.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2023Article
- Quantitative and objective diagnosis of color vision deficiencies based on steady-state visual evoked potentials.International ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Does Oblique Effect Affect SSVEP-Based Visual Acuity Assessment?Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Enhancing Performance of SSVEP-Based Visual Acuity via Spatial Filtering.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Assessing the Effect of the Refresh Rate of a Device on Various Motion Stimulation Frequencies Based on Steady-State Motion Visual Evoked Potentials.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Comparison of Modern Highly Interactive Flicker-Free Steady State Motion Visual Evoked Potentials for Practical Brain-Computer Interfaces.Brain sciences · 2020Article
- Anti-fatigue Performance in SSVEP-Based Visual Acuity Assessment: A Comparison of Six Stimulus Paradigms.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThere are several stimulus paradigms used in objective visual acuity assessment based on steady-state visual evoked potentials (SSVEPs). The aim of this study was to explore the difference and performance of common used six stimulus paradigms (reverse vertical sinusoidal gratings, reverse horizontal sinusoidal gratings, reverse vertical square-wave gratings, brief-onset vertical sinusoidal gratings, reversal checkerboards and oscillating expansion-contraction concentric-rings) of SSVEP acuity assessment.
methodsWe tested subjective visual acuity both by tumbling E and Freiburg Visual Acuity and Contrast Test (FrACT) in 11 subjects. SSVEPs were induced by 11 spatial frequencies for each paradigm, and then a threshold determination criterion was used to define the objective SSVEP visual acuity.
resultsAfter SSVEP signal analysis, we found there was difference in SSVEP response of harmonic components and no difference in sensitive electrode placement for the six paradigms. We selected six electrodes (PO3, POz, PO4, O1, Oz and O2) as the sensitive electrodes to use in data processing for each paradigm. The results showed that except for brief-onset vertical sinusoidal gratings, the correlation and agreement between objective SSVEP and subjective FrACT acuity were all quite good, demonstrating good performance in acuity detection for the rest five paradigms.
conclusionExcept for brief-onset vertical sinusoidal gratings, all the five stimulus paradigms of reverse vertical sinusoidal gratings, reverse horizontal sinusoidal gratings, reverse vertical square-wave gratings, reversal checkerboards and oscillating expansion-contraction concentric-rings performed quite well in objective SSVEP visual acuity assessment.
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.