ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2024
Ambient lighting alters pattern electroretinogram P50 peak time and spatial sensitivity.
Article in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Spatial Ambient Illumination on Pupil Diameter and Visual Acuity.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026Article
- Pseudo normative pattern electroretinograms in young children and infants.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Article
- Improving the reliability of the pattern electroretinogram with adaptive filtering.Scientific reports · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOur aim was to explore the effect of ambient lighting on the pattern ERG (PERG).
methodsWe compared PERGs recorded in two conditions; room lights on and room lights off. PERGs from 21 adult participants were recorded from each eye to high contrast checks of 50' side width, reversing 3rps in a large (30°) and then standard (15°) field. This was performed first in lights-ON conditions, then 2 min after the room lights were switched off. A minimum of 2 averages of 300 trials were acquired for each condition. A subset of 10 participants had PERGs recorded to a 50' check width with a range of stimulus contrasts (96-18%), also to a range of different check widths (100'-12') at high contrast in both ambient lighting conditions in a 30° field.
resultsThe lights-ON P50 median peak time (PT) was 3 ms earlier than the lights-OFF P50 from the 30° field (range 0-5 ms) and 15° field (range 0-6 ms). The earlier lights-ON P50 PT was evident at different stimulus contrasts, even after accounting for stimulus contrast reductions associated with stray ambient lighting in lights-ON conditions. Lights-OFF and lights-ON P50 PT were similar to different check widths; the lights-OFF P50 PT to a 50' check width matched the lights-ON P50 PT to a 25' check width.
conclusionPERG P50 PT in lights-ON ambient light conditions can be earlier than in lights-OFF ambient light conditions. The difference in P50 PT with ambient light may reflect alterations in spatial sensitivity associated with retinal adaptation. These results emphasise the clinical importance of consistent ambient lighting for PERG recording and calibration.
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.