ArticleNoro psikiyatri arsivi2020
Comparing Colored and White-Black Visual Evoked Potentials in Multiple Sclerosis Patients.
Article in Noro psikiyatri arsivi, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retinal optical coherence tomography measures in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2024Pooled it
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe compared white-black (WB), white-red (WR), and black-red (BR) checkerboard stimulated visual evoked potentials (VEPs) in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients and aimed to evaluate if redcolored VEP is more sensitive than WB VEP for the diagnosis of optic neuritis (ON).
methodsTwenty-nine MS patients (21 females [72.4%]) and 35 healthy control subjects (24 females [68.6%]) were included in the study. Neurological and ophthalmological examinations were conducted for all subjects and VEP and optical coherence tomography (OCT) investigations were performed.
resultsA significant difference was found between MS patients and the control group for WB, WR, BR stimulated VEP P100 latencies and retinal nerve fiber length (RNFL) and ganglion cell complex (GCC) thicknesses, but there was no difference for WB, WR, and rb stimulated VEP amplitude values between the groups. There was no significant pathological difference between the eyes with an ON history in MS and eyes without an ON history in MS and control subjects after WB, WR, and BR stimulation (p=).
conclusionsThe WB checkerboard stimulated VEP is an ample test for routine use; further studies are necessary regarding the utility of rb stimulated VEP in detecting subclinical ON.
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.