ArticleScientific reports2022
Reading text works better than watching videos to improve acuity in a simulation of artificial vision.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Seeing anew: Mechanisms, outcomes, and challenges in adapting to restored sight via visual prostheses.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2026Review
- Motion perception with visual prostheses.Progress in biomedical engineering (Bristol, England) · 2026Review
- Intravitreally Injected Plasmonic Nanorods Activate Bipolar Cells with Patterned Near-Infrared Laser Projection.ACS nano · 2025Article
- Article
- The Influence of Phosphene Synchrony in Driving Object Binding in a Simulation of Artificial Vision.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2023Article
- Attitudes of potential recipients toward emerging visual prosthesis technologies.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Toward a personalized closed-loop stimulation of the visual cortex: Advances and challenges.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Simulated artificial vision is used in visual prosthesis design to answer questions about device usability. We previously reported a striking increase in equivalent visual acuity with daily use of a simulation of artificial vision in an active task, reading sentences, that required high levels of subject engagement, but passive activities are more likely to dominate post-implant experience. Here, we investigated the longitudinal effects of a passive task, watching videos. Eight subjects used a simulation of a thalamic visual prosthesis with 1000 phosphenes to watch 23 episodes of classic American television in daily, 25-min sessions, for a period of 1 month with interspersed reading tests that quantified reading accuracy and reading speed. For reading accuracy, we found similar dynamics to the early part of the learning process in our previous report, here leading to an improvement in visual acuity of 0.15 ± 0.05 logMAR. For reading speed, however, no change was apparent by the end of training. We found that single reading sessions drove about twice the improvement in acuity of single video sessions despite being only half as long. We conclude that while passive viewing tasks may prove useful for post-implant rehabilitation, active tasks are likely to be preferable.
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.