ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2022
Visual Motion Coherence Responses in Human Visual Cortex.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dissociable effects of element-lifetime and stimulus-duration on local and global motion processing: An equivalent noise study.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Functional brain activity in persistent postural-perceptual dizziness (PPPD) during galvanic vestibular stimulation reveals sensitization in the multisensory vestibular cortical network.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Estimating neural activity from visual areas using functionally defined EEG templates.Human brain mapping · 2023Article
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 at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Random dot kinematograms (RDKs) have recently been used to train subjects with cortical scotomas to perform direction of motion discrimination, partially restoring visual motion perception. To study the recovery of visual perception, it is important to understand how visual areas in normal subjects and subjects with cortical scotomas respond to RDK stimuli. Studies in normal subjects have shown that blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) responses in human area hV5/MT+ increase monotonically with coherence, in general agreement with electrophysiology studies in primates. However, RDK responses in prior studies were obtained while the subject was performing fixation, not a motion discrimination condition. Furthermore, BOLD responses were gauged against a baseline condition of uniform illumination or static dots, potentially decreasing the specificity of responses for the spatial integration of local motion signals (motion coherence). Here, we revisit this question starting from a baseline RDK condition of no coherence, thereby isolating the component of BOLD response due specifically to the spatial integration of local motion signals. In agreement with prior studies, we found that responses in the area hV5/MT+ of healthy subjects were monotonically increasing when subjects fixated without performing a motion discrimination task. In contrast, when subjects were performing an RDK direction of motion discrimination task, responses in the area hV5/MT+ remained flat, changing minimally, if at all, as a function of motion coherence. A similar pattern of responses was seen in the area hV5/MT+ of subjects with dense cortical scotomas performing direction of motion discrimination for RDKs presented inside the scotoma. Passive RDK presentation within the scotoma elicited no significant hV5/MT+ responses. These observations shed further light on how visual cortex responses behave as a function of motion coherence, helping to prepare the ground for future studies using these methods to study visual system recovery after injury.
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.