ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2021
Developmental Effects on Pattern Visual Evoked Potentials Characterized by Principal Component Analysis.
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. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurophysiological Effects of Repeated Soccer Heading in Youth.Journal of biomechanical engineering · 2023Trial
- Sex-independent visual evoked potential complexity.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2026Article
- Physiological determinants of cortical P100 responses in pattern visual evoked potentials: a scoping review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Model based fitting of pattern reversal visually evoked potentials provides a reliable characterization of waveform components.Biomedical signal processing and control · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Peak amplitude and peak latency in the pattern reversal visual evoked potential (prVEP) vary with maturation. We considered that principal component analysis (PCA) may be used to describe age-related variation over the entire prVEP time course and provide a means of modeling and removing variation due to developmental age. Methods: PrVEP was recorded from 155 healthy subjects ages 11 to 19 years at two time points. We created a model of the prVEP by identifying principal components (PCs) that explained >95% of the variance in a "training" dataset of 40 subjects. We examined the ability of the PCs to explain variance in an age- and sex-matched "validation" dataset (n = 40) and calculated the intrasubject reliability of the PC coefficients between the two time points. We explored the effect of subject age and sex upon the PC coefficients. Results: Seven PCs accounted for 96.0% of the variability of the training dataset and 90.5% of the variability in the validation dataset with good within-subject reliability across time points (R > 0.7 for all PCs). The PCA model revealed narrowing and amplitude reduction of the P100 peak with maturation, and a broader and smaller P100 peak in male subjects compared to female subjects. Conclusions: PCA is a generalizable, reliable, and unbiased method of analyzing prVEP. The PCA model revealed changes across maturation and biological sex not fully described by standard peak analysis. Translational Relevance: We describe a novel application of PCA to characterize developmental changes of prVEP in youths that can be used to compare healthy and pathologic pediatric cohorts.
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.