ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2023
The diagnostic accuracy of photopic negative responses evoked by broadband and chromatic stimuli in a clinically heterogeneous population.
Article in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Applications of Photopic Negative Response: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Inner Retina Changes in ABCA4-Related Retinopathy: Structure-Function Relationship.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2025Article
- Association analyses of the measurements of the photopic negative response evoked by two ISCEV protocols.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2025Article
- Electrodiagnostic tests of the visual pathway and applications in neuro-ophthalmology.Eye (London, England) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare the diagnostic accuracy of the photopic negative response (PhNR) elicited by red-blue (RB) and white-white (WW) stimuli, for detection of retinal ganglion cell (RGC) dysfunction in a heterogeneous clinical cohort.
methodsAdults referred for electrophysiological investigations were recruited consecutively for this single-centre, prospective, paired diagnostic accuracy study. PhNRs were recorded to red flashes (1.5 cd·s·m
resultsTwo hundred and forty-three participants were initially enrolled, with 200 (median age 54; range 18-95; female 65%) meeting inclusion criteria. Sensitivity was 53% (95% confidence intervals [CI] 39% to 68%) and 62% (95% CI 48% to 76%), for WW and RB PhNRs, respectively. Specificity was 80% (95% CI 74% to 86%) and 78% (95% CI 72% to 85%), respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between sensitivities (p = 0.046) but not specificities (p = 0.08) of the two methods. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC) values were 0.73 for WW and 0.74 for RB PhNRs.
conclusionPhNRs to red flashes on a blue background may be more sensitive than white-on-white stimuli, but there is no significant difference between specificities. This study highlights the value and potential convenience of using white-on-white stimuli, already used widely for routine ERG assessment.
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.