ArticleNeuroImage2021
Neural markers of suppression in impaired binocular vision.
Article in NeuroImage, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neurophysiological basis for visual distortions in amblyopia.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Applications of dynamic gratings in neuro-ophthalmic disorders.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Attenuated and delayed neural activity in cortical microcircuitry of monocular processing and binocular interactions in human amblyopia.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Article
- The relationship between visual acuity loss and GABAergic inhibition in amblyopia.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Peripheral Binocular Imbalance in Anisometropic and Strabismic Amblyopia.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2024Article
- Dissociable Neural Mechanisms Underlie the Effects of Attention on Visual Appearance and Response Bias.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023Article
- Reduced interocular suppression after inverse patching in anisometropic amblyopia.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Quantitative interocular suppression in children with intermittent exotropia.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the Efficacy of a New Dichoptic Digital Platform to Treat the Anisometropic and Isometropic Amblyopia.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- The Study of Short-Term Plastic Visual Perceptual Training Based on Virtual and Augmented Reality Technology in Amblyopia.Journal of ophthalmology · 2022Article
- A Dichoptic Optokinetic Nystagmus Paradigm for Interocular Suppression Quantification in Intermittent Exotropia.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Even after conventional patching treatment, individuals with a history of amblyopia typically lack good stereo vision. This is often attributed to atypical suppression between the eyes, yet the specific mechanism is still unclear. Guided by computational models of binocular vision, we tested explicit predictions about how neural responses to contrast might differ in individuals with impaired binocular vision. Participants with a history of amblyopia (N = 25), and control participants with typical visual development (N = 19) took part in the study. Neural responses to different combinations of contrast in the left and right eyes, were measured using both electroencephalography (EEG) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Stimuli were sinusoidal gratings with a spatial frequency of 3c/deg, flickering at 4 Hz. In the fMRI experiment, we also ran population receptive field and retinotopic mapping sequences, and a phase-encoded localiser stimulus, to identify voxels in primary visual cortex (V1) sensitive to the main stimulus. Neural responses in both modalities increased monotonically with stimulus contrast. When measured with EEG, responses were attenuated in the weaker eye, consistent with a fixed tonic suppression of that eye. When measured with fMRI, a low contrast stimulus in the weaker eye substantially reduced the response to a high contrast stimulus in the stronger eye. This effect was stronger than when the stimulus-eye pairings were reversed, consistent with unbalanced dynamic suppression between the eyes. Measuring neural responses using different methods leads to different conclusions about visual differences in individuals with impaired binocular vision. Both of the atypical suppression effects may relate to binocular perceptual deficits, e.g. in stereopsis, and we anticipate that these measures could be informative for monitoring the progress of treatments aimed at recovering binocular vision.
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.