ArticleJournal of neurodevelopmental disorders2026
Electroretinography biomarkers indicate disrupted visual processing in Fragile X syndrome.
Article in Journal of neurodevelopmental disorders, 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.
- Electroretinographic Findings in Fragile X, Premutation, and Controls: A Study of Biomarker Correlations.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundObjective physiological biomarkers that index underlying neural circuit dysfunction, such as electroretinography (ERG), are needed in Fragile X syndrome (FXS) research. Fragile X syndrome (FXS) is a neurodevelopmental disorder caused by silencing of the FMR1 gene and loss of fragile X messenger ribonucleoprotein (FMRP), leading to synaptic dysfunction and prominent sensory processing abnormalities. This study evaluated whether ERG waveform differences are detectable in FXS using a handheld RETeval® protocol while accounting for key technical and physiological determinants of signal variability.
methodsERG recordings were obtained during routine clinic visits using the RETeval® system in 24 males with genetically confirmed FXS [aged (mean ± SD) 28 ± 10 years; 19 full mutation, 5 mosaic] and 19 neurotypical male controls [aged (mean ± SD) 26 ± 2 years]. Outcomes included flash and flicker ERG parameters (a- and b-wave amplitudes and time-to-peak; flicker amplitude and time-to-peak). Feasibility was assessed using ERG waveform acquisition and success rates.
resultsIndividuals with FXS demonstrated reduced flash b-wave amplitude (β = −6.84 µV; 95% CI [− 12.87 - −0.81]; p=.026) and prolonged time-to-peak for flash a-wave (β = 1.79 ms; 95% CI [0.32–3.26]; p=.017), flash b-wave (β = 1.10 ms; 95% CI [0.19–2.02]; p = .018), and flicker responses (β = 1.68 ms; 95% CI [0.49–2.88]; p=.006). Flash a-wave amplitude and flicker amplitude were not significantly different from controls. ERG feasibility was substantially reduced in FXS: participant-level flash acquisition and success were 67% and 46% in FXS versus 100% and 100% in controls, respectively (p=.0066 and p=.0001). Participant-level flicker acquisition and success were 46% and 38% in FXS versus 95% and 95% in controls (p=.0003 and p=.0001). No significant laterality effects were observed for waveform parameters or feasibility.
conclusionsHandheld, light-adapted ERG detected reproducible abnormalities in retinal function in FXS, consistently in reduced flash b-wave amplitude and delayed response timings, supporting altered post-photoreceptor processing as a physiological feature of FXS. Low acquisition and success rates in a routine outpatient clinic workflow indicate feasibility constraints, supporting use of ERG as a context-dependent biomarker for mechanistic studies and interventional trials.
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.