ReviewProgress in biomedical engineering (Bristol, England)2026
Motion perception with visual prostheses.
Review in Progress in biomedical engineering (Bristol, England), 2026. 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.
- Seeing anew: Mechanisms, outcomes, and challenges in adapting to restored sight via visual prostheses.Progress in retinal and eye research · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Visual prostheses represent a groundbreaking avenue for restoring vision in individuals with visual impairments. These devices utilize electrode arrays positioned in early visual processing areas, like the retina, thalamus, or primary visual cortex. Connected to a camera, they transform a stream of video to electrical stimulation to present the visual environment through patterned activation of phosphenes. Visual prostheses offer the potential to enhance visual function and thereby quality of life for users, however, understanding and replicating motion perception in a manner akin to natural vision remains a critical challenge for device designers. This review presents studies of motion perception in different visual prosthesis modalities and discusses their advantages and limitations. Retinal and cortical visual prostheses show significant potential in enhancing motion perception, but many implementations have shortcomings. Some challenges which remain for better motion perception in visual prosthesis are gaze contingency, the effective integration of machine vision, and understanding the involvement of higher-order visual areas. Despite these challenges, the current research should be viewed with substantial optimism for the future of restoring functional vision to visually impaired individuals.
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.