ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2024
Human Electroretinography Shows Little Polarity Specificity Following Full-Field Ramp Adaptation.
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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The oscillatory response of the electroretinogram and neuronal adaptation.Acta ophthalmologica · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The ramp aftereffect, a visual phenomenon in which perception of light changes dynamically after exposure to sawtooth-modulated light, was first described in 1967. Despite decades of psychophysical research, location and mechanisms of its generation remain unknown. In this study, we investigated a potential retinal contribution to effect formation with specific emphasis on on-/off-pathway involvement. Methods: A 100 ms flash electroretinogram (ERG) was employed to probe the adaptive state of retinal neurons after presentation of stimuli that were homogenous in space but modulated in time following a sawtooth pattern (upward or downward ramps at 2 Hz). Additionally, a psychophysical nulling experiment was performed. Results: Psychophysics data confirmed previous findings that the ramp aftereffect opposes the adapting stimuli in ramp direction and is stronger after upward ramps. The ERG study revealed significant changes of activity in every response component in the low-frequency range (a-wave, b-wave, on-PhNR, d-wave and off-PhNR) and high-frequency range (oscillatory potentials) in amplitudes, peak times, or both. The changes are neither specific to the on- or off-response nor antagonistic between ramp directions. With downward ramp adaptation, effects were stronger. Neither amplitudes nor peak times were correlated with perception strength. Amplitudes and peak times were uncorrelated, and the effect diminished over time, ceasing almost completely with three seconds. Conclusions: Despite abundant effects on retinal responses, the pattern of adaptational effects was not specific to the sawtooth nature of adaptation. Although not ruling out retinal contributions the present findings favor post-retinal mechanisms as the primary locus of the ramp aftereffect.
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.