ReviewMicromachines2020
Ultrasonic Retinal Neuromodulation and Acoustic Retinal Prosthesis.
Review in Micromachines, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultrasound-Mediated Thrombolysis: From Mechanistic Insights to Advanced Nanoplatforms and Clinical Translation.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Nanoparticle-based optical interfaces for retinal neuromodulation: a review.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2024Review
- Design and Simulation of a Ring Transducer Array for Ultrasound Retinal Stimulation.Micromachines · 2022Article
- Ultrasound stimulation for non-invasive visual prostheses.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2022Review
- Neuromodulation using electroosmosis.Journal of neural engineering · 2021Article
- Editorial for the Special Issue on Micro/Nanofabrication for Retinal Implants.Micromachines · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Ultrasound is an emerging method for non-invasive neuromodulation. Studies in the past have demonstrated that ultrasound can reversibly activate and inhibit neural activities in the brain. Recent research shows the possibility of using ultrasound ranging from 0.5 to 43 MHz in acoustic frequency to activate the retinal neurons without causing detectable damages to the cells. This review recapitulates pilot studies that explored retinal responses to the ultrasound exposure, discusses the advantages and limitations of the ultrasonic stimulation, and offers an overview of engineering perspectives in developing an acoustic retinal prosthesis. For comparison, this article also presents studies in the ultrasonic stimulation of the visual cortex. Despite that, the summarized research is still in an early stage; ultrasonic retinal stimulation appears to be a viable technology that exhibits enormous therapeutic potential for non-invasive vision restoration.
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.