ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2021
Mapping Visual Field Defects With fMRI - Impact of Approach and Experimental Conditions.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping human visual contrast sensitivity and vision loss across the visual field with model-based fMRI.eLife · 2026Article
- Robust and reproducible population receptive field mapping in patients with retinal pathologies.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Cortical response to transient and long-term visual field loss.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Article
- Biases in Volumetric Versus Surface Analyses in Population Receptive Field Mapping.Human brain mapping · 2025Article
- Functional MRI in optic neuritis: insights into cortical modulation and possible recovery mechanisms.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Rapid Campimetry in glaucoma - correspondence with standard perimetry and OCT.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The application of functional imaging in visual field defects: a brief review.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Review
- Non-Cartesian 3D-SPARKLING vs Cartesian 3D-EPI encoding schemes for functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging at 7 Tesla.PloS one · 2024Article
- Highly accurate retinotopic maps of the physiological blind spot in human visual cortex.Human brain mapping · 2022Article
- Electronic Cigarette Vaping Did Not Enhance the Neural Process of Working Memory for Regular Cigarette Smokers.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current initiatives to restore vision emphasize the need for objective assessments of visual field (VF) defects as pursued with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) approaches. Here, we compared population receptive field (pRF) mapping-based VF reconstructions to an fMRI method that uses more robust visual stimulation (on-off block design) in combination with individualized anatomy-driven retinotopic atlas-information (
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.