ArticleJournal of vision2025
Psychophysically measuring the efficiency of rods.
Article in Journal of vision, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Recent studies suggest that the efficiency of cones to detect photons can be evaluated by measuring the equivalent input noise (EIN; derived from contrast thresholds measured in the presence and absence of visual noise) under specific conditions in which the contrast threshold is limited by the variability in the number of photons detected by photoreceptors (i.e., photon noise). These conditions can be identified based on the known properties of photon noise: spatially and temporally white and inversely proportional to the luminance intensity. The present study aims to adapt this psychophysical paradigm to evaluate the efficiency of rods to detect photons. A motion direction discrimination task was used to evaluate the EIN over a wide range of luminance intensities for various spatial and temporal frequencies when the display was blue or red (to which rods have little sensitivity). The target was either a Gabor patch presented at 20 degrees of eccentricity (first experiment) or a rotating sine-wave annulus with a radius of 10 degrees of eccentricity (second experiment). In both experiments, the EIN was found to be inversely proportional to luminance intensity over a limited range of luminance intensities for both display colors. At these luminance intensities, the EIN was roughly independent of the spatial and temporal frequencies, matching the properties of photon noise. Furthermore, under these conditions, contrast thresholds were lower (i.e., better) when the display was blue rather than red, which suggests that vision was mediated by rods when the display was blue. We conclude that the efficiency of rods to detect photons can be evaluated by measuring contrast thresholds in the presence and absence of visual noise over a limited range of luminance intensities with a blue display.
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.