ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2022
Analysis of Multifocal Visual Evoked Potentials Using Artificial Intelligence Algorithms.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence in central nervous system autoimmune diseases: from clinical decision support to mechanistic discovery and translation.EMBO molecular medicine · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence-based analysis of visual electrophysiological signals for clinical interpretation support.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Refining Flash Visual Evoked Potential Analysis in Rats: A Novel Approach Using Bilateral Epidural Electrodes.Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
- Continuous Detection of Stimulus Brightness Differences Using Visual Evoked Potentials in Healthy Volunteers with Closed Eyes.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Clinical trials for remyelination in multiple sclerosis (MS) require an imaging biomarker. The multifocal visual evoked potential (mfVEP) is an accurate technique for measuring axonal conduction; however, it produces large datasets requiring lengthy analysis by human experts to detect measurable responses versus noisy traces. This study aimed to develop a machine-learning approach for the identification of true responses versus noisy traces and the detection of latency peaks in measurable signals. Methods: We obtained 2240 mfVEP traces from 10 MS patients using the VS-1 mfVEP machine, and they were classified by a skilled expert twice with an interval of 1 week. Of these, 2025 (90%) were classified consistently and used for the study. ResNet-50 and VGG16 models were trained and tested to produce three outputs: no signal, up-sloped signal, or down-sloped signal. Each model ran 1000 iterations with a stochastic gradient descent optimizer with a learning rate of 0.0001. Results: ResNet-50 and VGG16 had false-positive rates of 1.7% and 0.6%, respectively, when the testing dataset was analyzed (n = 612). The false-negative rates were 8.2% and 6.5%, respectively, against the same dataset. The latency measurements in the validation and testing cohorts in the study were similar. Conclusions: Our models efficiently analyze mfVEPs with <2% false positives compared with human false positives of <8%. Translational Relevance: mfVEP, a safe neurophysiological technique, analyzed using artificial intelligence, can serve as an efficient biomarker in MS clinical trials and signal latency measurement.
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.