Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40205293›Full record

ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2025

DTL versus skin electrodes in recording of multifocal pattern electroretinogram and multifocal photopic negative response.

Henrike Marie Nowitzki, Michael B Hoffmann, Khaldoon O Al-Nosairy

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Henrike Marie NowitzkiSection for Clinical and Experimental Sensory Physiology, Ophthalmology, Otto-Von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany.
Michael B Hoffmann *Section for Clinical and Experimental Sensory Physiology, Ophthalmology, Otto-Von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany.
Khaldoon O Al-Nosairy *Section for Clinical and Experimental Sensory Physiology, Ophthalmology, Otto-Von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany. Khaldoon.alnosairy@med.ovgu.de.ORCID 0000-0003-2057-651X

Funding

DFG SFB-854
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the photopic negative response of the multifocal ERG (mfERG

methodsTen "Young" [20-27 years] and eight "Old" [60-72 years] participants took part in this study. The electrophysiological responses were recorded binocularly using E

resultsAmplitudes of mfERG

conclusionsmfPERG & mfERG

Indexed as

Color VisionElectroretinographyRetinaAdultAgedElectrodesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhotic StimulationSignal-To-Noise RatioYoung AdultDTL electrodeERGmfERGPhNRmfPERGPhNRSkin electrodeSNR

Identifiers

PMID40205293
PMCPMC12137451

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.