Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37355647›Full record

ReviewJournal of physiological anthropology2023

Review on age-related differences in non-visual effects of light: melatonin suppression, circadian phase shift and pupillary light reflex in children to older adults.

Taisuke Eto, Shigekazu Higuchi

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of physiological anthropology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Minimal Mimics and Maps of Natural Light for Mammals.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Factors affecting sleep quality in hospitalised patients.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Taisuke EtoResearch Fellow of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, Kodaira, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0347-7408
Shigekazu HiguchiDepartment of Human Life Design and Science, Faculty of Design, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan. higu-s@design.kyushu-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7131-0792
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science · JPKyushu University · JP

Funding

JSPS KAKENHI JP20H01659JSPS KAKENHI JP23H02569JSPS KAKENHI JP23K14278
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Physiological effects of light exposure in humans are diverse. Among them, the circadian rhythm phase shift effect in order to maintain a 24-h cycle of the biological clock is referred to as non-visual effects of light collectively with melatonin suppression and pupillary light reflex. The non-visual effects of light may differ depending on age, and clarifying age-related differences in the non-visual effects of light is important for providing appropriate light environments for people of different ages. Therefore, in various research fields, including physiological anthropology, many studies on the effects of age on non-visual functions have been carried out in older people, children and adolescents by comparing the effects with young adults. However, whether the non-visual effects of light vary depending on age and, if so, what factors contribute to the differences have remained unclear. In this review, results of past and recent studies on age-related differences in the non-visual effects of light are presented and discussed in order to provide clues for answering the question of whether non-visual effects of light actually vary depending on age. Some studies, especially studies focusing on older people, have shown age-related differences in non-visual functions including differences in melatonin suppression, circadian phase shift and pupillary light reflex, while other studies have shown no differences. Studies showing age-related differences in the non-visual effects of light have suspected senile constriction and crystalline lens opacity as factors contributing to the differences, while studies showing no age-related differences have suspected the presence of a compensatory mechanism. Some studies in children and adolescents have shown that children's non-visual functions may be highly sensitive to light, but the studies comparing with other age groups seem to have been limited. In order to study age-related differences in non-visual effects in detail, comparative studies should be conducted using subjects having a wide range of ages and with as much control as possible for intensity, wavelength component, duration, circadian timing, illumination method of light exposure, and other factors (mydriasis or non-mydriasis, cataracts or not in the older adults, etc.).

Indexed as

MelatoninAdolescentAgedAgingChildCircadian RhythmHumansReflexReflex, PupillaryYoung AdultMelatoninAgingChildrenCircadian rhythmCrystalline lensLightMelatoninNon-image forming effectOlder adultsPupilPupillary light reflex

Identifiers

PMID37355647
PMCPMC10290329
OpenAlexW4381856982

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.