ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2021
Compartmental Differences in Macular Retinal Ganglion Cell Function.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate local differences of macular retinal ganglion cell (RGC) function by means of the steady-state pattern electroretinogram (SS-PERG). Methods: SS-PERGs were recorded in healthy subjects (n = 43) in response to gratings (1.6 c/deg, 15.63 reversals/s, and 98% contrast) presented on an LED display (800 cd/m2, 12.5 degrees eccentricity at 30 cm viewing distance) partitioned in triangular sectors (inferior [I]; nasal [N]; superior [S]; and temporal [T]) or concentric regions (central [C] and annulus [A]). For each partition, response amplitude (nV), amplitude adaptation (% change over recording time), phase/latency (deg/ms), and oscillatory potentials (OPs) amplitude (root mean square [RMS] nV) were measured. Data were analyzed with Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) statistics. Results: Amplitude differed (P < 0.001) between sectors (I: 254 nV; N: 328 nV; S: 275 nV; T: 264 nV; and N>T, I) as well as concentrically (C: 684 nV; A: 323 nV; and C>A). Latency did not differ between sectors (range = 53-54 ms, P = 0.45) or concentrically (range = 51-51 ms, P = 0.7). Adaptation did not differ (P = 0.66) concentrically (C: -19% and A: -22%) but differed (P = 0.004) between sectors (I: +25% and S: -29%). The OP amplitude did not differ (P = 0.5) between sectors (range = 63-73 nV) as well as concentrically (range = 82-90 nV, P = 0.3). Conclusions: Amplitude profiles paralleled RGC densities from histological studies. Adaptation profile suggested greater autoregulatory challenge in the inferior retina. Latency profile may reflect axonal conduction time to the optic nerve head assuming a direct relationship between axon length and its size/velocity. Location-independent OPs may reflect preganglionic activity. Translational Relevance: Normal macular RGC function displays local differences that may be related to local vulnerability in optic nerve disorders.
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.