Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38829669›Full record

ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2024

Influencing Factors on Pupillary Light Responses as a Biomarker for Local Retinal Function in a Large Normative Cohort.

Ricarda Jendritza, Krunoslav Stingl, Torsten Strasser, Ronja Jung, Felix Tonagel, Paul Richter, Anton Sonntag, Tobias Peters, Helmut Wilhelm, Barbara Wilhelm and 1 more

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Ricarda JendritzaPupil Research Group at the Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Krunoslav StinglUniversity Eye Hospital, Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Torsten StrasserPupil Research Group at the Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Ronja JungPupil Research Group at the Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Felix TonagelUniversity Eye Hospital, Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Paul RichterPupil Research Group at the Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Anton SonntagPupil Research Group at the Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Tobias PetersPupil Research Group at the Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Helmut WilhelmPupil Research Group at the Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Barbara WilhelmPupil Research Group at the Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Carina KelbschPupil Research Group at the Centre for Ophthalmology, University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Investigating influencing factors on the pupillary light response (PLR) as a biomarker for local retinal function by providing epidemiological data of a large normative collective and to establish a normative database for the evaluation of chromatic pupil campimetry (CPC). Methods: Demographic and ophthalmologic characteristics were captured and PLR parameters of 150 healthy participants (94 women) aged 18 to 79 years (median = 46 years) were measured with L-cone- and rod-favoring CPC protocols. Linear-mixed effects models were performed to determine factors influencing the PLR and optical coherence tomography (OCT) data were correlated with the pupillary function volume. Results: Relative maximal constriction amplitude (relMCA) and latency under L-cone- and rod-favoring stimulation were statistically significantly affected by the stimulus eccentricity (P < 0.0001, respectively). Iris color and gender did not affect relMCA or latency significantly; visual hemifield, season, and daytime showed only minor influence under few stimulus conditions. Age had a statistically significant effect on latency under rod-specific stimulation with a latency prolongation ≥60 years. Under photopic and scotopic conditions, baseline pupil diameter declined significantly with increasing age (P < 0.0001, respectively). Pupillary function volume and OCT data were not correlated relevantly. Conclusions: Stimulus eccentricity had the most relevant impact on relMCA and latency of the PLR during L-cone- and rod-favoring stimulation. Latency is prolonged ≥60 years under scotopic conditions. Considering the large study collective, a representative normative database for relMCA and latency as valid readout parameters for L-cone- and rod-favoring stimulation could be established. This further validates the usability of the PLR in CPC as a biomarker for local retinal function.

Indexed as

PupilReflex, PupillaryTomography, Optical CoherenceAdolescentAdultAgedBiomarkersFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansLightMaleMiddle AgedPhotic StimulationReference ValuesRetinaBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID38829669
PMCPMC11156203

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.