ArticleScientific reports2022
The p-ERG spatial acuity in the biomedical pig under physiological conditions.
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 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.
- Assessing the Relationship between Foveal Cone Density, Outer Nuclear Layer Thickness and Foveal Morphology.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- An in-depth characterization of development-related electroretinographical and morphological changes in Landrace pigs.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Graphene oxide increases the phototransduction efficiency of copolymeric nanoimplants and rescues visual functions in rat and pig models of Retinitis pigmentosa.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Metabolic regulation of visual acuity.Science advances · 2025Article
- Evaluating the repeatability of the multifocal electroretinogram in the cone dominant 13-lined ground squirrel.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pigs are becoming an important pre-clinical animal species for translational ophthalmology, due to similarities with humans in anatomical and physiological patterns. Different models of eye disorders have been proposed, and they are good candidates to assess biocompatibility/functionality of retinal prostheses. Electroretinography is a common tool allowing to gain information on retinal function, with several types of electroretinogram (ERG) been implemented including full field (ff-ERG), multifocal (mf-ERG) and pattern (p-ERG). p-ERG represents a valuable tool to monitor Retinal Ganglion Cells (RGCs) activity and can be used to calculate p-ERG spatial acuity. Unfortunately, scarce methodological data are available regarding recording/interpretation of p-ERG and retinal acuity in biomedical pigs yet enhancing knowledge regarding pig vision physiology will allow for more refined and responsible use of such species. Aim of this study was to record p-ERG in juvenile pigs to functionally assess visual acuity. Six female hybrid pigs underwent two p-ERG recording sessions at 16 and 19 weeks of age. Photopic ff-ERG were also recorded; optical coherence tomography (OCT) and histology were used to confirm retinal integrity. ff-ERG signals were repeatable within/across sessions. All p-ERG traces consistently displayed characterizing peaks, and the progressive decrease of amplitude in response to the increment of spatial frequency revealed the reliability of the method. Mean p-ERG spatial acuities were 5.7 ± 0.14 (16 weeks) and 6.2 ± 0.15 cpd (19 weeks). Overall, the p-ERG recordings described in the present work seem reliable and repeatable, and may represent an important tool when it comes to vision assessment in pigs.
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.