Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34447301›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2021

Visual Field Reconstruction in Hemianopia Using fMRI Based Mapping Techniques.

Hinke N Halbertsma, Holly Bridge, Joana Carvalho, Frans W Cornelissen, Sara Ajina

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. The Clinical Use of Retinotopy in Functional Hemianopia.Neuro-ophthalmology (Aeolus Press) · 2026
    Article
  3. Voxel-Based Lesion-Symptom Mapping Localizes Residual Visual Function in Hemianopia.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Hinke N HalbertsmaLaboratory for Experimental Ophthalmology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Holly BridgeWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Joana CarvalhoChampalimaud Centre for the Unknown, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal.
Frans W CornelissenLaboratory for Experimental Ophthalmology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Sara AjinaWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
University Medical Center Groningen · NLChampalimaud Foundation · PTUniversity College London · GBWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/K014382/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA stroke that includes the primary visual cortex unilaterally leads to a loss of visual field (VF) representation in the hemifield contralateral to the damage. While behavioral procedures for measuring the VF, such as perimetry, may indicate that a patient cannot see in a particular area, detailed psychophysical testing often detects the ability to perform detection or discrimination of visual stimuli ("blindsight"). The aim of this study was to determine whether functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) could be used to determine whether perimetrically blind regions of the VF were still represented in VF maps reconstructed on the basis of visually evoked neural activity.

methodsThirteen patients with hemianopia and nine control participants were scanned using 3T MRI while presented with visual stimulation. Two runs of a dynamic "wedge and ring" mapping stimulus, totaling approximately 10 min, were performed while participants fixated centrally. Two different analysis approaches were taken: the conventional population receptive field (pRF) analysis and micro-probing (MP). The latter is a variant of the former that makes fewer assumptions when modeling the visually evoked neural activity. Both methods were used to reconstruct the VF by projecting modeled activity back onto the VF. Following a normalization step, these "coverage maps" can be compared to the VF sensitivity plots obtained using perimetry.

resultsWhile both fMRI-based approaches revealed regions of neural activity within the perimetrically "blind" sections of the VF, the MP approach uncovered more voxels in the lesioned hemisphere in which a modest degree of visual sensitivity was retained. Furthermore, MP-based analysis indicated that both early (V1/V2) and extrastriate visual areas contributed equally to the retained sensitivity in both patients and controls.

conclusionIn hemianopic patients, fMRI-based approaches for reconstructing the VF can pick up activity in perimetrically blind regions of the VF. Such regions of the VF may be particularly amenable for rehabilitation to regain visual function. Compared to conventional pRF modeling, MP reveals more voxels with retained visual sensitivity, suggesting it is a more sensitive approach for VF reconstruction.

Indexed as

cortical blindnesspopulation receptive fieldresidual visionvisual cortexvisual field (VF)

Identifiers

PMID34447301
PMCPMC8382851
OpenAlexW3193002548

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.