Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40828524›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2025

The Effect of Contrast Reversal on Peripheral Visual Acuity.

Carlos R Cassanello, Neil W Roach, Chris Scholes, Paul V McGraw

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Carlos R CassanelloSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Neil W RoachSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Chris ScholesSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Paul V McGrawSchool of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Patients with central vision loss must rely upon regions of their unaffected peripheral retina to carry out fine-scale visual tasks. We aimed to determine the conditions under which contrast reversal of targets and/or backgrounds may act to improve visual acuity in the peripheral field. Methods: Ten participants with normal or corrected-to-normal vision performed a visual acuity task in which they were asked to identify the orientation of a letter-C target presented at 10° in the right visual field. Minimum letter size thresholds were measured for static (black or white) and contrast-reversing (8.5 or 17 Hz) targets presented on a uniform mean luminance background, a static patterned background, or a dynamic version of the patterned background, which was contrast reversing at the same temporal frequencies used for the targets. Results: When presented on a uniform background, black targets produced lower thresholds than white targets, and there was no consistent benefit of contrast reversal. However, when presented on a patterned background, acuity for contrast-reversing targets consistently exceeded that for either polarity static target. Contrast reversing the background also improved acuity, for both static targets and targets that contrast reversed at a different rate. Conclusions: Peripheral visual acuity is significantly enhanced by dynamic contrast modulation, particularly when the modulation acts to promote segmentation between target and background. Translational Relevance: Adding temporal modulation to the target or background could provide a simple way of enhancing peripheral acuity for patients with central vision loss.

Indexed as

Contrast SensitivityVisual AcuityVisual FieldsAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhotic StimulationSensory ThresholdsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40828524
PMCPMC12369918

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.