Trial reportTranslational vision science & technology2020
Detectability and Bias Indices of Pneumatic Corneal Stimuli Using Signal Detection Theory.
Trial report in Translational vision science & technology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex Coordinates Contextual Mental Imagery for Single-Beat Manipulation during Rhythmic Sensorimotor Synchronization.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Multiple Criterion and Multiple Stimulus Signal Detection Theory Analysis of Corneal Painful and Cool Pneumatic Stimuli.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility of using signal detection theory (SDT) in estimating criterion and detectability indices for corneal pneumatic stimuli and test corneal psychophysical data against linking hypotheses from nonprimate physiology using Bayesian analysis. Methods: Corneal pneumatic stimuli were delivered using the Waterloo Belmonte esthesiometer. Corneal thresholds were estimated in 30 asymptomatic participants and 1.5× threshold stimuli were used as signals (with 0.4 probability). There were 100-trial mechanical and cold stimulus experiments and 50-trial chemical experiments. Trials were demarcated auditorily and "yes" or "no" recorded after each trial. Cold stimulus experiments were conducted with 0.6 signal probability. Criterion ( Results: Average Conclusions: Our experiments are the first to demonstrate the feasibility of estimating SDT indices and test different hypotheses. The conservative strategy (reporting "no" more often) chosen by participants was anticipated due to relatively large proportion of catch trials. Translational Relevance: SDT when using pneumatic esthesiometry is vital to evaluate bias in responses of participants. Considering the varied forms of inherent noise in the corneal sensory system, SDT is critical to understand the sensory and decisional characteristics.
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.